The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Laurent Guyénot Archive
RFK’s False-Flag Assassination, and the Forgotten Palestinian Patsy
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

On June 6, 1968, Robert Kennedy had just won the California Democratic presidential primary, when he was shot dead, five years after his brother. David Talbot has shown in his book Brothers: The Hidden History of the Kennedy Years, published in 2007 by Simon & Schuster, that Robert had never believed in the conclusion of the Warren Commission Report, and that, had he succeeded in becoming the next American president, he would have done his utmost to set up a new investigation. Whether he would have been able to get to the bottom of it is another matter. But it is a reasonable assumption that the forces that had killed John were the same that killed Robert on his way to reclaim the White House. After all, as Laurence Leamer writes in Sons of Camelot: “Bobby had been the president’s alter ego and protector. . . . He had loved his brother so intensely and served him so well that within the administration it was hard to tell where one man ended and the other began.”[1]Laurence Leamer, Sons of Camelot: The Fate of an American Dynasty, HarperCollins, 2005, kindle 225. After 1963, Robert was still his brother’s continuation. He was the heir and the avenger.

That is why I have argued before — and I repeat in my new book — that the ultimate key to the JFK whodunit is in RFK’s assassination, which has a very clear, unmistakable Israeli signature. RFK’s assassination is a masterwork of false flag operation, designed by a supremely intelligent, Machiavellian, and organized cabal, the same that orchestrated one year earlier, with Johnson’s complicity, the attempted false flag attack on the USS Liberty (watch the new groundbreaking four-part documentary film Sacrificing Liberty).

What is truly extraordinary, and demonstrates an unmatched expertise in the industry of lies, is that the conspirators succeeded to get rid of Robert Kennedy while at the same time blaming the assassination on their enemies — the Palestinians — and thereby giving themselves both an alibi and a victim’s role: through RFK, Israel was the target, they claim.

Sirhan Sirhan, the “virulent anti-Semite”

Just hours after Robert’s assassination, the press informed the American people, not only of the identity of the assassin, but also of his motive, and even of his detailed biography.[2]Watch in Evidence of Revision: Part 4: The RFK assassination as never seen before, 01:11:42 Twenty-four-year-old Sirhan Bishara Sirhan was born in Jordan, and had moved to the United States when his family was expelled from West Jerusalem in 1948. After the shooting, a newspaper clipping was found in Sirhan’s pocket, quoting Robert’s following statement: “The United States should without delay sell Israel the 50 Phantom jets she has so long been promised.” Handwritten notes by Sirhan found in a notebook at his home confirmed that his act had been premeditated and motivated by his hatred of Israel.

That became the mainstream storyline from day one. Jerry Cohen of the Los Angeles Times wrote a front page article, saying that Sirhan is “described by acquaintances as a ‘virulent’ anti-Israeli” (Cohen changed that into “virulent anti-Semite” in an article for the Salt Lake Tribune), and that: “Investigation and disclosures from persons who knew him best revealed [him] as a young man with a supreme hatred for the state of Israel.” Cohen infers that “Senator Kennedy . . . became a personification of that hatred because of his recent pro-Israeli statements.” Cohen further revealed that, about three weeks before the shooting, Sirhan wrote “a memo to himself” that said, “Kennedy must be assassinated before June 5, 1968,” that is, Cohen notes, “the first anniversary of the six-day war in which Israel humiliated three Arab neighbors, Egypt, Syria and Jordan.”[3]Jerry Cohen, “Yorty Reveals That Suspect’s Memo Set Deadline for Death,” Los Angeles Times, June 6, 1968, on latimesblogs.latimes.com; Jerry Cohen, “Jerusalem-Born Suspect Called An Anti-Semite,” The Salt Lake Tribune, June 6, 1968, on www.newspapers.com.

After September 11, 2001, the tragedy of Robert’s assassination was rewritten and installed into the Neocon mythology of the “Clash of Civilizations” and the “War on Terror.” A book entitled The Forgotten Terrorist, by Mel Ayton (2007), purports to present “a wealth of evidence about [Sirhan’s] fanatical Palestinian nationalism,” and to demonstrate that “[Sirhan’s] politically motivated act was a forerunner of present-day terrorism.”

In 2008, on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of Bobby’s murder, Sasha Issenberg of the Boston Globe recalled that the death of Robert Kennedy was “a first taste of Mideast terror.” He quotes Harvard professor Alan Dershowitz saying: “It was in some ways the beginning of Islamic terrorism in America. It was the first shot. A lot of us didn’t recognize it at the time.”[4]Sasha Issenberg, “Slaying gave US a first taste of Mideast terror,” Boston Globe, June 5, 2008, on www.boston.com‬ That Sirhan was from a Christian family was lost on Dershowitz.

Rabbi Jeffrey Salkin took care to mention it in The Forward, only to add that Islamic fanaticism ran in his veins anyway: “But what he shared with his Muslim cousins — the perpetrators of September 11 — was a visceral, irrational hatred of Israel. It drove him to murder a man whom some still believe might have been the greatest hope of an earlier generation. . . . Sirhan hated Kennedy because he had supported Israel.”

And so, the Forward insists: “One cannot help but note the parallel between [Robert] Kennedy’s assassination and the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. In both tragic cases, Arab fanaticism reared its ugly head on American soil, irrevocably changing the course of events in this country.”[5]Jeffrey Salkin, “Remember What Bobby Kennedy Died For,” Forward.com, June 5, 2008. Also Michael Fischbach, “First Shot in Terror War Killed RFK,” Los Angeles Times, June 02, 2003, on articles.latimes.com And the lesson: “In remembering Bobby Kennedy, let us remember not just what he lived for, but also what he died for — namely, the precious nature of the American-Israeli relationship.”[6]Jeffrey Salkin, “Remember What Bobby Kennedy Died For,” Forward.com, June 5, 2008. In other words: let’s propagate the narrative, for it is good for Israel.

On the fiftieth anniversary, the narrative was well rehearsed: Robert got killed because he was “pro-Israel”.[7]Judy Maltz, “Bobby Kennedy’s Little-known Visit to the Holy Land That Made Him pro-Israel – and Got Him Killed,” The Forward, June 8, 2018, on www.haaretz.com/ Therefore his murder was a crime against Israel.

For anyone familiar with the history of the Kennedy clan, there is something odd in the notion that the assassination of Robert Kennedy was a crime against Israel. Robert had not been, in his brother’s government, a pro-Israel Attorney General. He had infuriated Zionist leaders by supporting an investigation led by Senator William Fulbright and the Committee on Foreign Relations, aimed at registering the American Zionist Council as a “foreign agent”, which would had considerably hindered its efficiency.[8]The Israel Lobby Archive, www.irmep.org/ila/forrel/

In 1968, Robert Kennedy had not suddenly turned pro-Israel. He was simply trying to attract Jewish votes, as everyone else. Robert’s statement in an Oregon synagogue, mentioned in the May 27 Pasadena Independent Star-News article found in Sirhan’s pocket, didn’t exceed the minimal requirements. Its author David Lawrence had, in another article entitled “Paradoxical Bob,” underlined how little credit should be given to such electoral promises: “Presidential candidates are out to get votes and some of them do not realize their own inconsistencies.”[9]David Lawrence, “Paradoxical Bob,” Independent Star-News, May 26, 1968, page 14, on www.newspapers.com/; Shane O’Sullivan, RFK Must Die, on YouTube, at 00:14. In fact, as Arthur Krock has noted, the supposed motive for RFK’s murder is itself paradoxical: “If this motive was his position that the United States was committed to preserve Israel as a nation, his statement was made with more moderation than that of other important political persons who said the same thing.”[10]Arthur Krock, Memoirs: Sixty Years on the Firing Line, Funk & Wagnalls, 1968, p. 347.

All things considered, there is no ground for believing that Robert Kennedy would have been, as president of the U.S.A., particularly Israel-friendly.

Did Sirhan kill Robert Kennedy?

If we trust official statements and mainstream news, the assassination of Robert Kennedy is an open-and-shut case. The identity of the killer suffers no discussion, since he was arrested on the spot, with the smoking gun in his hand.

ORDER IT NOW

In reality, ballistic and forensic evidence shows that none of Sirhan’s bullets hit Kennedy. According to the autopsy report of Chief Medical Examiner-Coroner Thomas Noguchi, Robert Kennedy was hit by three bullets, while a fourth went through his coat. All these bullets were shot from behind Kennedy: two of them under his right armpit, following an upward angle, and the third, the fatal bullet, behind his right ear, at point blank range. Dr. Noguchi reaffirms his conclusion in his memoirs, Coroner (1983). Yet the sworn testimonies of twelve witnesses established that Robert had never turned his back on Sirhan and that Sirhan was five to six feet away from his target when he fired. Moreover, Sirhan was physically overpowered by Karl Uecker after his second shot, and, although he continued pressing the trigger mechanically, his revolver was not directed towards Kennedy anymore.

By tallying all the bullet impacts in the pantry, and those that wounded five people around Kennedy, it has been estimated that at least twelve bullets were fired, while Sirhan’s gun carried only eight. On April 23, 2011, attorneys William Pepper and Laurie Dusek gathered all this evidence and more in a 58-page file submitted to the Court of California, with a request that Sirhan’s case be reopened. They pointed out major irregularities in the 1968 trial, notably that the serial number of Sirhan’s pistol did not match the serial number of the pistol by which were test fired the bullets compared with those extracted from Robert’s brain.[11]First discovered in 1970 by Pasadena criminologist William Harper. John Crewdson, “6 Years Later, Evidence in Sirhan’s Case Is Questioned,” New York Times, December 15, 1974, on www.nytimes.com Pepper also provided a computer analysis of audio recordings during the shooting, made by engineer Philip Van Praag in 2008, which confirms that two guns are heard.[12]Frank Morales, “The Assassination of RFK: A Time for Justice!” June 16, 2012, on www.globalresearch.ca; watch “RFK Assassination 40th Anniversary (2008) Paul Schrade on CNN” on YouTube. Paul Schrade, a Kennedy confidant who was behind Robert during the shooting and received one of Sirhan’s bullets, has long believed there was a second shooter. He testified at Sirhan’s 2016 parole hearing, and told him: “the evidence clearly shows that you were not the gunman who shot Robert Kennedy.”[13]“Robert F Kennedy’s killer loses 15th parole bid as witness says: ‘It’s my fault’”, Feb 11, 2016, on www.thegardian.com Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and his sister Kathleen have joined Schrade and support the call for a reinvestigation of the assassination.[14]Stephanie Haney “Bobby Kennedy’s children at war with each other over new death probe,” June 2, 2018, on dailymail.com

The presence of a second shooter was mentioned by several witnesses and reported on the same day by a few news outlets. There are strong suspicions that Robert’s real assassin was Thane Eugene Cesar, a security guard hired by the Hotel Ambassador, property of Zionist businessman Myer Schine. Cesar was stuck behind Kennedy at the moment of the shooting, and some people saw him draw his pistol. One of them, Don Schulman, positively saw him fire.[15]Watch Ted Charach and Gerald Alcan’s film The Second Gun: Who Really Killed Robert Kennedy, 1998 , on YouTube. Incredibly, Cesar’s weapon was never examined, and he was never interrogated, even though he did not conceal his hatred for the Kennedys.[16]Philip Melanson, The Robert F. Kennedy Assassination: New Revelations On the Conspiracy And Cover-Up, S.P.I. Books , 1994, p. 25.

Even if we assumed that Sirhan did kill Robert Kennedy, a second aspect of the case raises question: Sirhan seemed to be in a state of trance during the shooting, and of disorientation just after. More importantly, Sirhan has always claimed that he has never had any recollection of his act. Fifty years after the facts, he continues to declare: “I was told by my attorney that I shot and killed Senator Robert F. Kennedy and that to deny this would be completely futile, [but] I had and continue to have no memory of the shooting of Senator Kennedy.” He also claims to have no memory of “many things and incidents which took place in the weeks leading up to the shooting.”[17]In a parole hearing in 2011. Watch “Sirhan Sirhan Denied Parole” on YouTube. Some repetitive lines written of a notebook found in Sirhan’s bedroom, which Sirhan recognizes as his own handwriting but does not remember writing, are reminiscent of automatic writing: there is a whole page of fifteen repetitions of “RFK must die, Robert F. Kennedy must be assassinated, assassinated, assassinated, assassinated,” suddenly turning to “I have never heard please pay to the order of of of of of.”[18]Shane O’Sullivan, Who Killed Bobby? The Unsolved Murder of Robert F. Kennedy, Union Square Press, 2008, pp. 5, 44, 103.

Psychiatric expertise, including lie-detector tests, has confirmed that Sirhan’s amnesia is not faked. Therefore, experts in hypnosis and mental manipulation believe that Sirhan has been submitted to hypnotic programming. “It was obvious that he had been programmed to kill Robert Kennedy and programmed to forget that he had been programmed,” stated Dr. Robert Blair.[19]In Shane O’Sullivan’s 2007 documentary RFK Must Die: The Assassination of Bobby Kennedy, on YouTube. In 2008, Harvard University professor Daniel Brown, a noted expert in hypnosis and trauma memory loss, interviewed Sirhan for a total of 60 hours, and concluded that Sirhan, whom he classified among “high hypnotizables,” acted involuntarily under the effect of hypnotic suggestion: “His firing of the gun was neither under his voluntary control, nor done with conscious knowledge, but is likely a product of automatic hypnotic behavior and coercive control.” During his sessions with Dr. Brown, Sirhan could remember having been accompanied by an attractive woman, before suddenly finding himself at a shooting range with a weapon he did not know. According to Brown’s report, “Mr. Sirhan did not go with the intent to shoot Senator Kennedy, but did respond to a specific hypnotic cue given to him by that woman to enter ‘range mode,’ during which Mr. Sirhan automatically and involuntarily responded with a ‘flashback’ that he was shooting at a firing range at circle targets.” Later, attorney William Pepper found an entry in the police file that showed that, just days before the assassination, Sirhan had visited a firing range, accompanied by an unknown instructor.[20]Jacqui Goddard, “Sirhan Sirhan, assassin of Robert F.Kennedy, launches new campaign for freedom 42 years later,” The Telegraph, Dec. 3, 2011, on www.telegraph.co.uk

Mossad, Mental control, and false-flag terrorism

ORDER IT NOW

We know that in the 1960s, American military agencies were experimenting on mental control. Dr. Sidney Gottlieb, son of Hungarian Jews, directed the infamous CIA MKUltra project, which, among other things, were to answer questions such as: “Can a person under hypnosis be forced to commit murder?” according to a declassified document dated May 1951.[21]Colin Ross, Bluebird: Deliberate Creation of Multiple Personality by Psychiatrists, Manitou Communications, 2000, summary on www.wanttoknow.info/bluebird10pg As Larry Romanoff has pointed out, MKUltra was an overwhelmingly Jewish enterprise, with people like Dr. John Gittinger, Harris Isbell, James Keehner, Lauretta Bender, Albert Kligman, Eugene Saenger, Chester Southam, Robert V. Lashbrook, Harold Abramson, Charles Geschickter, and Ray Treichler.[22]Larry Romanoff, “CIA Project MK-Ultra,” on www.unz.com

In his book Rise and Kill First: The Secret History of Israel’s Targeted Assassinations (2018), Israeli journalist Ronen Bergman has revealed that, in May 1968, the month preceding Robert Kennedy’s assassination, the Israeli Military Intelligence (AMAN) was planning to assassinate Yasser Arafat by hypnotically programming a Palestinian. The idea was proposed by a Navy psychologist named Binyamin Shalit, who claimed that, “if he was given a Palestinian prisoner — one of the thousands in Israeli jails — with the right characteristics, he could brainwash and hypnotize him into becoming a programmed killer. He would then be sent across the Jordan, join the Fatah there, and, when the opportunity arose, do away with Arafat.” The proposal was approved. Shalit selected a 28-year-old Palestinian from Bethlehem, whom he deemed easily suggestionnable. The operation failed, but it proves that, in 1968 precisely, Israel was practicing a method of assassination identical to the one used against Robert Kennedy.[23]Ronen Bergman, Rise and Kill First: The Secret History of Israel’s Targeted Assassinations, Random House, 2018, pp. 117-119.

Moreover, manipulating Palestinians to make them commit crimes, or committing crimes and blaming Palestinians for them, bears the signature of Israel. According to former Mossad agent, Victor Ostrovsky, in 1991 elements of the Mossad were plotting an attempt on the life of President George H. W. Bush. Bush had resisted an unprecedented pro-Israel lobbying campaign that called for $10 billion to help Jews immigrate from the former Soviet Union to Israel, complaining in a televised press conference on September 12 that “one thousand Jewish lobbyists are on Capitol Hill against little old me.”[24]Alexander Cockburn, ed., The Politics of Anti-Semitism, AK Press, 2003, p. 104. Worse, there was his policy of pressuring Israel to the negotiating table at the Madrid Conference by freezing their loan guarantees. Israel had had enough of him. The plan was to leak words to the Spanish police that terrorists were on their way, kill Bush and, in the midst of the confusion, release three Palestinians captured earlier and kill them on the spot.[25]Victor Ostrovsky, The Other Side of Deception: A Rogue Agent Exposes the Mossad’s Secret Agenda, HarperCollins, 1994.

It is well known that Israel has a long history and a grand expertise in false flag terrorism. A report of the U.S. Army School for Advanced Military Studies (SAMS), quoted by the Washington Times on September 10, 2001, described the Israeli Intelligence agency as: “Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target U.S. forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act.”[26]Rowan Scarborough, “U.S. troops would enforce peace Under Army study,” The Washington Times, 10 septembre 2001, on www.washingtontimes.com That statement was made public on the day before 9/11.

The pattern dates from before the creation of the Jewish State, with the bombing of the King David Hotel, headquarter of the British authorities in Jerusalem, in the morning of July 22, 1946. Six terrorists of the Irgun dressed as Arabs brought 225 kg of explosives hidden in milk churns into the building. When a British officer became suspicious and gunshot ensued, the Irgun members fled after igniting the explosives. The explosion killed 91 people, mostly British, but also 15 Jews.

The strategy was repeated in Egypt during the summer of 1954, with Operation Susannah. The goal was to compromise the British’s withdrawal from the Suez Canal, demanded by Colonel Abdul Gamal Nasser with support from President Eisenhower. Egyptian Jews trained in Israel bombed several British targets, then put the blame on the Muslim Brotherhood. The accidental detonation of an explosive device allowed the exposure of the conspiracy, which led to the “Lavon Affair”, from the name of the Defense Minister who was held responsible.

There are more of the same stories in Gordon Thomas’s Gideon’s Spies: the Secret History of the Mossad (2009).[27]Gordon Thomas, Gideon’s Spies: The Secret History of the Mossad, St. Martin’s Press, 1999, pp. 384-385 and 410-411. By definition, false-flagged Arab terrorism is only exposed when it fails, and we cannot know how many such operations have been set up by the Mossad. But from the revelations of Ronen Bergman in Rise and Kill First, Sirhan sure looks like a typical made-in-Mossad Palestinian patsy.

There are still, of course, unanswered questions, such as: How did Sirhan find himself in the kitchen pantry of the Ambassador Hotel at midnight on June 6, 1968, with a pistol in his pocket? Sirhan himself declared it was by accident, or by mistake, but then he doesn’t remember much of that evening. Another question is: Why did Kennedy, after finishing his speech, exit the ballroom through the kitchen pantry, instead of walking through the crowd of his supporters, as he usually did? To this question, there is an answer: according to a campaign volunteer present at the scene and interviewed by Michael Piper, it was Frank Mankiewicz who insisted that Robert go this way.[28]Piper, Final Judgment, pp. 343, 347. Now, isn’t it awkward that Mankiewicz had started his career in public relations “as civil rights director for the western branch of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith,” as he mentions in his autobiography.[29]Frank Mankiewicz, So As I Was Saying… My Somewhat Eventful Life, with Joel Swerdlow, MacMillan, 2016, p. 10. (The ADL, remember, was founded in 1913 by the B’nai B’rith to defend the convicted child rapist and murderer Leo Frank.)[30]Ron Unz, “American Pravda: The ADL in American Society,” October 15, 2018, on unz.com. In 1991, Mankiewicz handled publicity for Oliver Stone’s film JFK.

Content of my new book, The Unspoken Kennedy Truth:

  • Introduction
  • 1. RFK’S False-Flag Assassination
  • 2. JFK and the Samson Option
  • 3. LBJ, Israel’s Best Friend
  • 4. Jack Ruby, Gangster for Zion
  • 5. Jim Angleton, Mossad’s CIA Asset
  • 6. Joe, the Cursed Peacemaker
  • 7. JFK Jr., the Slain Prince
  • 8. Forrestal, Kennedy’s Foreshadow
  • Conclusion

Watch the video based on my earlier Kennedy research:

Laurent Guyénot, Ph.D., is the author of The Unspoken Kennedy Truth (2021), “Our God is Your God Too, But He Has Chosen Us”: Essays on Jewish Power (2020), and From Yahweh to Zion: Jealous God, Chosen People, Promised Land (2018).

Notes

[1] Laurence Leamer, Sons of Camelot: The Fate of an American Dynasty, HarperCollins, 2005, kindle 225.

[2] Watch in Evidence of Revision: Part 4: The RFK assassination as never seen before, 01:11:42

[3] Jerry Cohen, “Yorty Reveals That Suspect’s Memo Set Deadline for Death,” Los Angeles Times, June 6, 1968, on latimesblogs.latimes.com; Jerry Cohen, “Jerusalem-Born Suspect Called An Anti-Semite,” The Salt Lake Tribune, June 6, 1968, on www.newspapers.com.

[4] Sasha Issenberg, “Slaying gave US a first taste of Mideast terror,” Boston Globe, June 5, 2008, on www.boston.com

[5] Jeffrey Salkin, “Remember What Bobby Kennedy Died For,” Forward.com, June 5, 2008. Also Michael Fischbach, “First Shot in Terror War Killed RFK,” Los Angeles Times, June 02, 2003, on articles.latimes.com

[6] Jeffrey Salkin, “Remember What Bobby Kennedy Died For,” Forward.com, June 5, 2008.

[7] Judy Maltz, “Bobby Kennedy’s Little-known Visit to the Holy Land That Made Him pro-Israel – and Got Him Killed,” The Forward, June 8, 2018, on www.haaretz.com/

[8] The Israel Lobby Archive, www.irmep.org/ila/forrel/

[9] David Lawrence, “Paradoxical Bob,” Independent Star-News, May 26, 1968, page 14, on www.newspapers.com/; Shane O’Sullivan, RFK Must Die, on YouTube, at 00:14.

[10] Arthur Krock, Memoirs: Sixty Years on the Firing Line, Funk & Wagnalls, 1968, p. 347.

[11] First discovered in 1970 by Pasadena criminologist William Harper. John Crewdson, “6 Years Later, Evidence in Sirhan’s Case Is Questioned,” New York Times, December 15, 1974, on www.nytimes.com

[12] Frank Morales, “The Assassination of RFK: A Time for Justice!” June 16, 2012, on www.globalresearch.ca; watch “RFK Assassination 40th Anniversary (2008) Paul Schrade on CNN” on YouTube.

[13] “Robert F Kennedy’s killer loses 15th parole bid as witness says: ‘It’s my fault’”, Feb 11, 2016, on www.thegardian.com

[14] Stephanie Haney “Bobby Kennedy’s children at war with each other over new death probe,” June 2, 2018, on dailymail.com

[15] Watch Ted Charach and Gerald Alcan’s film The Second Gun: Who Really Killed Robert Kennedy, 1998 , on YouTube.

[16] Philip Melanson, The Robert F. Kennedy Assassination: New Revelations On the Conspiracy And Cover-Up, S.P.I. Books , 1994, p. 25.

[17] In a parole hearing in 2011. Watch “Sirhan Sirhan Denied Parole” on YouTube.

[18] Shane O’Sullivan, Who Killed Bobby? The Unsolved Murder of Robert F. Kennedy, Union Square Press, 2008, pp. 5, 44, 103.

[19] In Shane O’Sullivan’s 2007 documentary RFK Must Die: The Assassination of Bobby Kennedy, on YouTube.

[20] Jacqui Goddard, “Sirhan Sirhan, assassin of Robert F.Kennedy, launches new campaign for freedom 42 years later,” The Telegraph, Dec. 3, 2011, on www.telegraph.co.uk

[21] Colin Ross, Bluebird: Deliberate Creation of Multiple Personality by Psychiatrists, Manitou Communications, 2000, summary on www.wanttoknow.info/bluebird10pg

[22] Larry Romanoff, “CIA Project MK-Ultra,” on www.unz.com

[23] Ronen Bergman, Rise and Kill First: The Secret History of Israel’s Targeted Assassinations, Random House, 2018, pp. 117-119.

[24] Alexander Cockburn, ed., The Politics of Anti-Semitism, AK Press, 2003, p. 104.

[25] Victor Ostrovsky, The Other Side of Deception: A Rogue Agent Exposes the Mossad’s Secret Agenda, HarperCollins, 1994.

[26] Rowan Scarborough, “U.S. troops would enforce peace Under Army study,” The Washington Times, 10 septembre 2001, on www.washingtontimes.com

[27] Gordon Thomas, Gideon’s Spies: The Secret History of the Mossad, St. Martin’s Press, 1999, pp. 384-385 and 410-411.

[28] Piper, Final Judgment, pp. 343, 347.

[29] Frank Mankiewicz, So As I Was Saying… My Somewhat Eventful Life, with Joel Swerdlow, MacMillan, 2016, p. 10.

[30] Ron Unz, “American Pravda: The ADL in American Society,” October 15, 2018, on unz.com.

 
Hide 475 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. The Kennedys were undone by hubris.

    Unaware that he had killed several men on his way to the Senate, they humiliated Johnson, fired the psychopathic Allen Dulles, stiffed the Joint Chiefs at Guantanamo, enraged Big Oil by trying to revoke the depletion allowance, attacked the mobsters who had won Ohio for Jack, and told the world that, against his will, J. Edgar Hoover would be retiring in three years.

    Their father, who put them into the White House, could have saved them but he had a stroke and they were not smart enough to realize that they had lost their protection.

  2. Fact: Sirhan was at the scene with a gun and wanted to kill RFK.
    Fact: He fired at RFK.
    Conclusion: He should be dead instead of in prison.

    That he was a patsy has no relevance to what he actually did. That he wasn’t successful simply means he’s inept. That others were involved is a given and the ‘system’ has protected them for decades, just as it protected the assassins who killed JFK.

    Want to know more: https://youtu.be/KxxUR1nLwl4

  3. Thane Cesar worked security in the classified units of Hughes Corporation and Lockheed, two DOD contractors deeply penetrated by the CIA. Cesar was also on the payroll of Robert Maheu, a former FBI agent turned private spook for the CIA. Zionist skullduggery has been and continues to be rampant in Europe and the United States. But Thane Cesar, the assassin of RFK, had CIA fingerprints all over him.

    • Agree: Alfred
    • Replies: @Richard B
    , @Leo Den
  4. anonymous[173] • Disclaimer says:

    CIA has lots of you foreign propaganda guys. None of you ever explain how Israel/Saudis/Pakistanis//…mastermind(i) penetrated government and law enforcement from top to bottom and coordinated them in multiple intricate assassination projects, but CIA’s sprawling counterintelligence apparat never noticed.

    This is just pap for CIA’s cartoonish stereotype of right-wing morons. CIA thinks, these mooks hate Jews, they’ll swallow it hook, line, and sinker. This is how stupid they think you are.

    • Replies: @James Forrestal
  5. Vinnie O says:

    Bobby Kennedy was killed by a single shot to the back of his head. The shot was fired at a range close enough to singe the hair on the back of his neck.

    Sirhan was of course standing IN FRONT of Bobby, firing BLANKS. The reason for firing those blanks was to cover up the sound of the OTHER gun.

    The ONLY person who could have fired such a shot was one of the FBI “bodyguards”.

    Bobby was murdered because he had a good chance to be elected Prez o’ US. And if Bobby EVER became Prez, he would have re-opened the investigation of the murder of his brother, JFK. So RFK was killed by the same people who killed JFK.

    Although NO ONE talks about the “plane crash” that killed JFK, Jr., that was also an assassination for the purpose of ensuring that NO ONE EVER made an honest investigation of the murder of JFK, Sr.

  6. @Vinnie O

    Agreed. I did talk about JFK Jr. here:
    https://www.unz.com/article/the-broken-presidential-destiny-of-jfk-jr/
    And I have a chapter on him in my new Unspoken Kennedy Truth book

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  7. Katy says:

    Sirhan’s safety is often in my mind since the death of Epstein and the attempt on Sirhan.
    Looks like Barr was trying to clean up CIA tracks.

    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
  8. Katy says:

    My understanding is that Maheu was the conduit between the CIA and the Mafia
    in at least the JFK assassination. Mafia includes both Italian and Jewish/Israeli groupings. But the order and primary coverup was from the CIA (or acting former CIA). You don’t usually hear about military generals, but they had to be in on it too. LBJ was clearly not a mastermind though must have been involved to a degree. Same with Hoover.

    I was a college student in LA at the time of the RFK assassination,
    not that it makes me an expert, but it made me aware then and concerned and
    investigating ever since.

    I have read all of Laurent Guyenot’s works and most of it was powerfully eye opening,
    especially about the history and “purpose” of the Old Testament Bible. I am grateful to him for this work.

    He seems to me on less solid ground when it comes to who can control things in the US.

  9. Notsofast says:

    m.k.ultra/cia/mossad cannot be separated. creating unwitting assassins is a major part of why the program was created. sirhan sirhan’s handler “the girl in the polka dot dress” was seen by 25 witnesses but dismissed as a figment of the imagination of an overwrought campaign worker who claimed she heard her say “we shot him, we shot him”. the camel faced woman of the joe/camel administration refused to allow sirhan sirhans parole even though bobby kennedy jr. requested it. guess that handlers have to have to watch out for each other.

  10. Icy Blast says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    You should call yourself “Brainfree.”

    • Agree: Realist
  11. Franz says:

    A successful conspiracy, by definition, can’t be proven. But Guyenot comes close, I think.

    Years ago I talked to Charlie Kaiser who had written a book called 1968 in America. The intriguing section in the book explains what happened to the “Clean for Gene” movement.

    The Clean for Gene people were antiwar protestors who stayed short haired, clean, conservative attire, male or female, and opposed the war on principled and patriotic grounds. Gene McCarthy came within a few points of beating Lyndon Johnson, the war president, in the New Hampshire Primary. This jolted the party since both Gene and Lyndon were Democrats. Hope spread fast, hence the young people who joined up and volunteered their time for Gene, who wanted to pull out of Vietnam and go with the peace offer on the table then.

    Bobby Kennedy jumped in right after that, stealing Gene MacCarthy’s fire as “peace candidate” but not Gene’s followers, loyal as stumps.

    When the news of Bobby Kennedy’s death reached the MacCarthy campaign, people were naturally shocked and saddened. Except for Gene. The campaign people working near him were stunned when, after a few moments of silence, Gene quietly started to speak.

    “His own fault, isn’t it?” Gene MacCarthy said. “All that pandering and supporting Israel was going to get him something, and now it has, hasn’t it?”

    The kids were stunned. The quote has been watered down, or ignored, but that was the “official cospiracy theory” of 68 — RFK”s support for Israel caused a crazy Muslim to shoot him. Kaiser did not know how many of Gene’s Clean followers quit right then and there, but lots of people liked Gene anyway because he wasn’t the only one thinking that sort of thing then.

    There might be irony in that fact.

    • Replies: @S
    , @Alden
    , @niteranger
  12. @Godfree Roberts

    They certainly had made many powerful enemies.

  13. US and Western political invertebrates don’t pander for Jewish votes-they grovel for Jewish MONEY, the Universal Lubricant of electoral success.

    • Thanks: Joe Levantine
  14. @Laurent Guyénot

    Down to the third generation, is it not-Judaic vengeance. JFK, JFK Jnr and his unborn child. Mission accomplished. Who’s next?

    • Replies: @S
  15. @Godfree Roberts

    And he attacked the Israel A-bomb program and wanted to end the Federal Reserve, that financial yeshiva. They were lining up to top him, then his brother.

    • Thanks: Godfree Roberts
    • Replies: @Jefferson Temple
  16. Anon[423] • Disclaimer says:

    Handwritten notes by Sirhan found in a notebook at his home

    So the terrorists’ attitude of being found with such notes in their pockets, or having them at home ready for investigators to find them is an old-time one. lol.

    let’s propagate the narrative, for it is good for Israel.

    Such a strange behaviour. Normal would be to imitate Whites, specially the more “learned” and credentialed, and propagate narratives that are bad for themselves and their kin.

    • Replies: @Rev. Spooner
  17. The mystery here is why Sirhan is still alive. Even the man purported to be Rudolph Hess had to be dispensed with at some point before release from prison.

  18. Katy says:
    @The Alarmist

    I agree that it’s a mystery he is still alive. Other than it would need someone in the DOJ with the determination to see that he was carefully assassinated. You know there was a recent attempt on his life, don’t you? Right around the time Epstein died. As long as Barr was head of DOJ I was extremely concerned about Sirhan.

    Of course, originally they expected him to be executed and the California had the audacity to eliminate the death penalty.

    • Thanks: Pheasant, Ann Nonny Mouse
  19. Anon[213] • Disclaimer says:

    FBI document warns conspiracy theories are a new domestic terrorism threat
    https://news.yahoo.com/fbi-documents-conspiracy-theories-terrorism-160000507.html

    • Replies: @CelestiaQuesta
  20. lloyd says: • Website

    To understand Robert Kennedy’s support for Israel, we have to enter the mental world of post World War Two. Robert wanted Israel’ s nuclear programme ended because the Cold War required a bi polar between nuclear powers, US and USSR. A nuclear Israel would make Israel a super power as has indeed happened. Otherwise Robert, a war vet, loved Israel as an epitome of frontier America. Also Israel’s social programme as contrasted with America’s predatory capitalism greatly appealed. Robert’s visit to Israel and deprecation of the Arabs fitted that era. The Arabs and Islam were not popular as backward peoples except for some Arabian Nights nostalgia. I have read a book that Iranian agents were also involved in his assassination. This was the era of the Shah who was covertly allied to Israel

  21. It is a shame the boats bringing the Kennedy family to the US were not sunk. All immigration from Ireland after 1790 has been bad for America and Americans. That an Irish papist was president was a disgrace to all Americans.

    • Troll: Pheasant
  22. S says:
    @Mulga Mumblebrain

    Christina Onassis believed the Kennedy’s were cursed, and after her brothers death in an aircraft accident in 1973, she convinced her grieving father of the same.

    Onassis’ daughter Christina made it clear that she disliked Jacqueline Onassis, and after Alexander’s death, she convinced her father that Jacqueline had some kind of curse due to the assassinations of John and Robert F. Kennedy.

    Interestingly, however, Aristotle Onassis would ultimately conclude it was the CIA that had murdered his son.

    Onassis had refused to believe that his son’s death was an accident, believing it was due to the machinations of the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the leader of the Greek military junta, Georgios Papadopoulos.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle_Onassis

  23. S says:
    @Franz

    I once read of a security expert who had been around during the 60’s who believed RFK’s assassination was almost inevitable as RFK routinely disregarded security protocols regarding his exposure to large crowds.

    • Replies: @Franz
  24. Hibernian says:
    @Chris Mallory

    What about the boats bringing your ancestors to Georgia in the 18th Century as convicts?

    • LOL: Fred777
  25. @RoatanBill

    That others were involved is a given and the ‘system’ has protected them for decades, just as it protected the assassins who killed JFK.

    Since a president Robert would have been determined to get to who killed his brother, it is practically a foregone conclusion they were both killed by the exact same crew.

    • Agree: Realist
  26. loren says:

    I am in lost angeles. [oops, meant los] and know a bit about so called secret societies.

    RUMOR IS MANLY HALL HYPNOTIZED SIRHAN, MORE THAN ONCE.

  27. @Mulga Mumblebrain

    James Corbett has reported that the subject of your second claim is a myth. JFK wanted to increase the Fed, not end it.

  28. Alden says:

    Sirhan Sirhan wasn’t a Muslim he was Christian Greek Orthodox variety. In 1948 When he was 4 years old armed Israeli troops cane to his family’s 10 room house and gave them one hour to pack up what they could carry and get out. His father was fired from his city of Jerusalem water department job as soon as Zionists bribed blackmailed and threatened United Nations delegates to declare Israel a nation.

    The family went to live in a Greek Orthodox pilgrim hostel. 7 kids mostly boys youngest 4 how’d you like that. One of the boys was killed in a Zionist terrorist bombing at a crowded rush hour intersection about a year before. The Church refugee program brought the Sirhan to Pasadena Ca. They bought a house and settled in.

    Having been kicked out of his home at age 4 by armed troops Sirhan was righteously resentful of the Zionists. He grew more anti Zionist at Pasadena community college because of pro Israel Jewish professors.

    Kennedy ran in the California primary. He promised arms and support to Israel. So Sirhan shot him.

    Robert Kennedy was as anti White as his brothers. He lobbied for the 1965 and 1968 unlimited non White immigration and affirmative action bills. He marched at the head of MLK’s funeral, practically shoving the widow out of the way for photo opportunities. He also massively supported the Hispanic cause and was one of the first anti White Democrats to lobby for Hispanics to get affirmative action benefits. Although that didn’t happen until 1970. By the time JFK was elected, Robert was a hard core anti White.

    He’s dead. Sirhan Sirhan confessed to shooting Kennedy because of Kennedy’s support for Israel and the Israelis who stole his family’s home.

    If you’re pro Israel and love the American politicians who give more to Israel than to the American taxpayers, you would have lived Kennedy at the time.

    If you’re anti White and pro black and brown you should mourn Kennedy as an anti White, pro black and brown pro black on White crime and pro affirmative action discrimination against White Americans dead martyr.

    If you are pro White and against affirmative action discrimination against White Americans you are a misinformed ignoramus if you mourn Robert Kennedy.

    If you are pro Palestinian and anti the Israeli property grabbers you are a misinformed ignoramus if you mourn the pro Israel Kennedy.

    All 3 Kennedy brothers were anti White. March 1961 less than 2 months after he became President JFK issued executive order 10925 I believe it was mandating that all federal agencies SHALL take affirmative action to hire blacks over Whites.

    Ted lobbied for the 64 civil rights for all but Whites act, the 65 unlimited non White immigration act. The 68 affirmative action act and every anti White law and judicial appointment in his long career.

    And Robert disdained Whites and slobbered over MLK Jesse Jackson Cesear Chavez and every black and brown activist in existence. And he was a vociferous supporter of Israel and the anti White Jewish organizations in America.

    Someone shot him. Sirhan Sirhan claimed he shot Robert Kennedy. Robert was as much an enemy of Whites and Palestinians as Johnson was.

    Had Robert Kennedy become President he would have been as anti White as Nixon or worse.

    Sirhan Sirhan had an excellent motive; revenge. The Jews didn’t. Robert Kennedy was a puppet of jews both in domestic ( anti White) and foreign affairs.

    Robert Kennedy was pro school de segregation and bussing , pro affirmative action, pro Hispanic pro black soft on black crime and anti White.

    Any White man who mourns the Kennedys is anti White negro lover and Zionist.

  29. @Vinnie O

    “Although NO ONE talks about the “plane crash” that killed JFK, Jr.,”

    JFK Jr killed himself and his passengers by entering Instrument Meteorological Conditions during a night cross-country flight. He did not have an instrument rating and was not qualified to carry out the flight. The aircraft entered a spiral dive, which is very common when people without instrument ratings enter IMC. This happens even to qualified people of not much experience.

    .

    • Replies: @Rich
    , @anonymous
  30. Ghali says:

    Israeli war criminal Arial Sharon once said: “Jews control America”. They can twisted America like they twist any simple thing. Shame on all Americans to submit to the whim of an ugly and vicious religious tribe that has second to nothing to be associated with American culture. All their energy and money are directed to support Israel’s terror against the Palestinians.

    • Replies: @moi
  31. Alden says:
    @Franz

    Senator McCarthy has the right idea.

    If anyone other than a dispossessed Palestinian bent on revenge for America’s support of Israel, killed Kennedy, it wasn’t Israel. Israel, ADL AJC the anti war crowd the negro lover jews, jews loved Kennedy donated money, campaigned for him and mourned his death Kennedy was a negro loving Israel loving presidential candidate supported by both Israel and American Jews.

    • Replies: @Franz
  32. The following topics come to mind.

    Israel does indeed have a history of unmasked false-flag operations: the Lavon Affair, the attack on the Liberty, their proven awareness beforehand that the 9/11 attacks were going to happen, where, and how.

    So unless we’re to assume they’re invariably incompetent, it follows that there must also have been false-flag operations that were never uncovered. Like, say, the assassination of Robert Kennedy. But this is hardly proof that this was in fact what happened. It merely demonstrates that it’s not inconceivable.

    Then there’s Sirhan Sirhan himself. What was he like? Had he had similar episodes in the past: committing violent acts and having no memory of them? Was he deranged in some way that suggested such behavior was possible? We know, for example, that the young Adolf Hitler was transported when he saw Wagner’s Rienzi — the story of a man who rises to become the savior of his people. Obviously, this prefigured Hitler’s later career. Was there anything in Sirhan’s life that prefigured an assassination attempt?

    Was there other evidence that Sirhan was worked up about Kennedy and Israel? Surely there should have been more than reading a clipping that Kennedy was for an arms sale. What was he saying to people? What had he been reading? Was Sirhan even aware of who was running for President?

    If Israel was in fact behind the killing, how were they sure they would benefit? Was it, in June, clear that if Kennedy lived, he would get the nomination and beat the Republican nominee, and that if he did, that he would be dramatically worse for Israel than the apparent alternatives at that point?

    • Replies: @Old and Grumpy
    , @Alden
  33. @The Alarmist

    Sirhan doesn’t remember anything (because of his hypnosis), therefore he is not dangerous.

    The Jews made a mistake by choosing a Christian Palestinian as their “typical fanatical Muslim terrorist”, but they hoped the gullible American public would not notice, which of course was the case.

  34. @Chris Mallory

    WASP hatred for “papist” Irish is so passé.

    (but is Mallory not an Irish name?)

    • Replies: @Sollipsist
  35. This bit from Wikipedia is worth mentioning.

    ‘…On February 10, 2016, at his 15th parole hearing, he [Sirhan] was denied parole again. One of Sirhan’s shooting victims from that night, Paul Schrade, aged 91 at the time of the hearing, testified in his support, stating his belief that a second shooter killed Kennedy and that Sirhan was intended to be a distraction from the real gunman by an unknown conspiracy…’

  36. Ghali says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    You brainless Americans need to get rid of Jews.

    • Replies: @Richard B
    , @Rev. Spooner
  37. Wake up says:

    Joe Biden thinks of himself as today’s Bobby Kennedy. What they do have in common is the fact that both are ruthless politicians, who would pander to any group they feel necessary to get elected.

  38. Schuetze says:

    So these “people” murdered Tsar Nicholas and two Kennedy’s, false flagged 9/11, faked the Holocaust, aand genocided Ukraine, Armenia, Palestine, and Germany. But they would never, ever have burned down the Reichstag or faked the Gleiwitz incident.

  39. I appreciate that this article is just an excuse to list a bunch of other fringe theories as authoritative, like tying junk mortgages together before the 2008 financial crisis was supposed the make them substantial, but “hypnotism”? To find your way in front of the President, pull out a gun and repeatedly work the trigger? This is stupid.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    , @EuroNat
    , @Daniel Rich
  40. Zago says:

    William Pepper is the understated hero of this long sad saga of this sordid tale. That those who perpetuated the murders are still in charge is disquieting to say the least.

  41. @Vinnie O

    “Although NO ONE talks about the “plane crash” that killed JFK, Jr., that was also an assassination for the purpose of ensuring that NO ONE EVER made an honest investigation of the murder of JFK, Sr.”

    I saw John-John with his maternal cousin a few days before the crash in Soho and said hello. He was a fine dude and would not be surprised if he was assassinated as well by the same forces that had killed his father and uncle but the saddest thing is that the Kennedy women have ended up on the wrong side.

  42. Lee says:
    @Vinnie O

    Vin said:

    Sirhan was of course standing IN FRONT of Bobby, firing BLANKS. The reason for firing those blanks was to cover up the sound of the OTHER gun.

    Total nonsense.

    Kennedy had been shot three times. One bullet was fired at a range of perhaps 1 inch (3 cm) and entered behind his right ear, dispersing fragments throughout his brain.[41] The other two entered at the rear of his right armpit; one exited from his chest and the other lodged in the back of his neck.[4

    Wiki

    Five other people were wounded by the “blanks” that SS fired after RFK had been shot.

    Five other people were wounded: William Weisel of ABC News, Paul Schrade of the United Automobile Workers union, Democratic Party activist Elizabeth Evans, Ira Goldstein of the Continental News Service, and Kennedy campaign volunteer Irwin Stroll.[24]

  43. Hughes says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    Or alternatively he’s naïve to count the patriotic Americans to bring about his vengeances if the mafia within the government kill him. The fabled patriotic Americans who would topple their government in revolution in the end is just that. A child fable story.

    • Agree: Realist
  44. Ron Unz says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    I appreciate that this article is just an excuse to list a bunch of other fringe theories as authoritative, like tying junk mortgages together before the 2008 financial crisis was supposed the make them substantial, but “hypnotism”? To find your way in front of the President, pull out a gun and repeatedly work the trigger? This is stupid.

    Given the remarkable facts revealed in Ronen Bergman’s authoritative 2018 book on the history of Mossad assassinations, it’s not as “stupid” as all that. Here are a couple of relevant paragraphs from the lengthy article I published in early 2020:

    A young Palestinian named Sirhan Sirhan had fired a pistol at the scene and was quickly arrested and convicted for the murder. But Talbot emphasizes that the coroner’s report revealed that the fatal bullet came from a completely different direction, while the acoustical record proves that far more shots were fired than the capacity of the alleged killer’s gun. Such hard evidence seems to demonstrate a conspiracy.

    Sirhan himself seemed dazed and confused, later claiming to have no memory of events, and Talbot mentions that various assassination researchers have long argued that he was merely a convenient patsy in the plot, perhaps acting under some form of hypnosis or conditioning. Nearly all these writers are usually reluctant to note that the selection of a Palestinian as scapegoat in the killing seems to point in a certain obvious direction, but Bergman’s recent book also includes a major new revelation. At exactly the same moment that Sirhan was being wrestled to the floor of the Ambassador Hotel ballroom in Los Angeles, another young Palestinian was undergoing intensive rounds of hypnotic conditioning at the hands of Mossad in Israel, being programmed to assassinate PLO leader Yasir Arafat; and although that effort ultimately failed, such a coincidence seems to stretch the bounds of plausibility.

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-mossad-assassinations/#final-judgment-on-the-jfk-assassination

    • Agree: Thim
    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  45. Richard B says:
    @Ghali

    You brainless Americans need to get rid of Jews.

    What country doesn’t? The entire Middle East dances to their tune. Or, if they don’t, is unable to defeat them.

    Anyone who makes a comment like yours and doesn’t say where they are from is a troll.

    • Replies: @Lucy Lipinska
  46. Realist says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    The Kennedys were undone by hubris.

    You mean they should have done as they were told by the powers that be.

    Your argument is never to challenge the unelected ghost government…Deep State. You are arguing for a mafia-style government.

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  47. Richard B says:
    @SunBakedSuburb

    Thane Cesar, the assassin of RFK, had CIA fingerprints all over him.

    And what is the CIA but a tool of Jewish Supremacy Inc.?

  48. @RoatanBill

    Fact: Sirhan was absent from the scene, holding a gun, and had been hypnotised.
    Fact: He fired at random, missing RFK.
    Conclusion: You need your brain washed.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  49. Rich says:
    @acementhead

    You’re probably right, but it does seem a bit coincidental that he was the only possible roadblock to Hilary Clinton getting the democratic nod for the NY senate seat. His “convenient” death gave her the job. A lot of people who get in the way of the Clintons die. They are not a group to mess around with.

  50. @Godfree Roberts

    If it was hubris, it was the hubris of the father, not the sons. Joseph Kennedy Senior intended to start an American political dynasty using his sons, and that was unacceptable to the men who control America. It is not well known, and never discussed, that it was not JFK who was intended to be President, but his older brother Joe Junior. As can be seen by family group photos, Joe Junior had all the charisma, self confidence, and physical vitality that JFK lacked: a young JFK looks cancerous and mentally disturbed. In 1944, Joseph Junior, despite having completed his 20 combat aviation missions and scheduled to return stateside, volunteered for a secret mission piloting an explosives laden B-24 drone, that shortly after take off blew up. No trace of his body was ever found. Joseph Junior was the first Kennedy brother to be assassinated. Joseph Senior ignored the warning and pushed on so they destroyed his entire family. “Memory Hole” seems to be the theme with The Kennedys. The story of Joe Junior’s murder, and even his mere existence, was memory holed by the media, and even historians, when they mention the “Kennedy brothers”, only speak of John, Robert, and Teddy. Joe Junior memory holed. Memory holed in Dallas: even the super-sleuths refuse to look at the south end of The Triple Underpass, the only place the kill shot could have come from. RFK was murdered in a tight crowded hotel kitchen, but nobody can remember anything, even Sirhan Sirhan can’t remember. Teddy can’t remember Chappaquiddick, which is understandable as he wasn’t in the death car or anywhere near it. John Junior simply disappeared off a radar screen.

    • Agree: Pheasant
    • Thanks: Old and Grumpy, R2b
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Wielgus
  51. @Ron Unz

    My assertion was that hypnotism of that sort is a fantasy. It could never come close to serving the function that was alleged. Your reply, ironically, provides evidence for me. It would never work.

    I admire the ability to construct convincing arcane theories from cherry-picked facts and authoritative use of adjectives. It appeals to the amateur detective in me.

    I like taking them to their conclusions more, though, and seeing how absurd those are when compared back to the real world.

    Had a sinister grouping discovered how to create hypnotised assassins a half a century ago, there is no interest of theirs that they would not be able to achieve by now.

    Yet the group you accuse has not even been able to deal with the Palestinians. In the meantime, countless peace settlements, successful ethnic cleansings, large scale massacres, and more, have taken place around the world, ignored and/or forgiven.

    My impression is that you paint the Israelis/”deep state neocons”/Jews as Saturday morning cartoon villains. They are all powerful, utterly ruthless, constantly scheming, and yet somehow never achieve more than the most ordinary of their aims. This is too funny.

    • Replies: @ingotus
    , @Mario Partisan
    , @anon
    , @S
  52. @Franklin Ryckaert

    And that made them bold enough to pin 9/11 on a bunch of Islamic terrorists. The system is superb; when discussing 9/11 in 2011 with one of my American cousins, he looked at me like I had come from Mars when I asked him about the the third building (7) falling down without being hit. His answer was “ what building you are talking about”. That got me curious and I researched to find out if my cousin’s reaction was a rarity and to my big surprise it turned out that up to that date only 25% of the American public were aware of the fall of three buildings all in all. Free US media indeed!

    • Replies: @TheTrumanShow
    , @nsa
  53. @Franklin Ryckaert

    Most likely, the Jew hates the intellectual Christian Palestinians more than the pig hating Muslims of Palestine and also, it was far easier for Christians like Said, Nader and Sirhan to emigrate to the US than the Muslims at large.

    • Replies: @Franklin Ryckaert
    , @Ivan
  54. MLK says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    When it comes to grand conspiracies the devil is never in the details. They are not puzzles that can be solved.

    One feature is that once the event occurs, information and disinformation emanates globally in such an overwhelming, conflicting fashion it’s impossible to keep it straight unless you give way to bias confirmation and reductionism.

    Make no mistake, each revelation is functional. Some in furtherance of the conspiracy, some to constrain lines of reasoning threatening to interests whatever their culpability.

    Assassinating, or attempting to assassinate, presidents and presidential candidates has waxed and waned in American history. It’s almost strange to think of the mass psychological effect of this period of assassination, if you will, that began with JFK, followed by MLK and RFK.

    The Kennedys were undone by hubris.

    This is post-hoc reasoning. After all, whatever else you might say of him, long-reigning Erdogan, is the poster boy for leader hubris yet he’s still there.

    Though if you make too many powerful enemies eventually someone is going to take a shot. Think of it as the coalition of the willing.

    We all crave and grow comfortable with the coutours of what did and didn’t happen as if was ordained. Thus Kerry made fun of W. Bush for sitting in that elementary school classroom on live TV as if, regardless of what he (W) and those protecting him knew, he was safe as a kitten.

    I’ve mentioned the Vincennes/Lockerbie as elucidating in terms of the functionality of the resolve. With the US and Iran, the two indisputable moving parties, conspiring to make Libya the dirty dog.

  55. anonymous[231] • Disclaimer says:
    @acementhead

    JFK Jr killed himself and his passengers by entering Instrument Meteorological Conditions during a night cross-country flight.

    You’re a stinking troll trying to suggest a potential flight hazard is a certainty in order to cover your people’s blood libel against the Kennedys. JFK Jr. was by all accounts a competent pilot who may not have been instrument rated, but perfectly capable of flying by instrument. For those who may not know, students from almost day one are taught at times using a flight hood that forces them to maintain straight-and-level flight and manage controlled turns strictly by the instruments available on the plane.

    Well over 50 years ago on my first solo cross-country as a 17-year-old, and because of a delay getting oil for the Cessna 150 I was flying, I was sent off into twilight conditions and found myself for the first time night flying, not to mention in instrument conditions. I could not as a kid have been further from instrument rating than I was at that point. Ground control at my local airport handed me over to ground control at a major hub with distance radar, whose directions through controlled turns and so on put me safely and precisely over the intersection of my airport’s runway, at which point I was coached down in the local pattern without incident by the tower. I didn’t panic for one moment, and we can be sure that a together person like JFK Jr. didn’t, either.

    Go screw yourself you miserable, lying bastard. How is is that your ilk hates the Irish with a blood libel the way you do?

  56. @Alden

    The Kennedys did not bring black slaves to America. Nor did their ancestors, I suspect. Since your WASP ancestors did it, desegregation was inevitable, and so were all kinds of trouble. I tend to think that desegregation under the Kennedys would have been less painful than it has been. Under Johnson, the White youth became neurotic, drug-addict, and self-hating. I don’t think this would have been the case if the Kennedys had been at the White House from 1960 to 1976. In any case, I do not claim that RFK was perfect. He was, indeed, surrounded by Jews. The point is, as I write in my book:
    The Kennedys are important not for who they were as individuals, or even as a clan, but for what America lost when she was deprived of their leadership, again and again. The Kennedys are important because a rational, comparative study of their murders reveals the ugly truth behind the smoke screen of the “Kennedy curse”, and exposes the deep power that has enslaved America ever since.

  57. moi says:
    @Ghali

    Crazy Americans love Israel and hate Arabs/Muslims although, unlike Jews, Muslims honor and revere Christ. America is truly a nutty and screwed up culture.

    • Agree: Gaspar DeLaFunk
  58. @Badger Down

    If he was absent from the scene, then how could he have fired at RFK and missed?

    No one can be hypnotized without their cooperation.

    So, I assume it’s OK for anyone to shoot at you and you’d be fine with that as long as the bullet missed you.

    • Replies: @Z-man
    , @Colin Wright
    , @HbutnotG
  59. @A Half Naked Fakir

    Well, they had to find a person who is susceptible to hypnosis. Not everybody is. Probably they couldn’t find in haste a Muslim one and had to make do with a Christian.
    Most Americans are blissfully unaware that there are also Christians in the Middle East.
    They assume that all Arabs are Muslims. Much of the success of the Jews in the US is possible because of the ignorance and gullability of the public.

    • Replies: @A Half Naked Fakir
  60. @Colin Wright

    Richard Nixon, via Henry Kissinger, was very good for the Israelis. Would mystery votes in Illinois and Texas happen for Bobby like they did for John? We will never know. Joe Kennedy was a ruthless, power driven man, which is why the Kennedy mystique has always been both amusing and a mystery. Perhaps Joe could have pulled another presidential election off for another son.

  61. christoso says:

    According to campaign workers at the scene, RFK wanted to exit the ballroom through the crowd, but his press secretary, Frank Mankiewicz insisted that he leave through the pantry, having arranged a midnight press briefing in a nearby room. Kennedy was told that he needed to hold the briefing so that he could appear on the morning news the following day. Oddly, Mankiewicz later denied having played this role, contradicting the accounts of Kennedy’s staff. As Guyenot points out, Mankiewicz was formerly a publicist for the Zionist ADL. Collins Piper, by the way, goes off on a tangent suggesting that Iran somehow had a hand in the RFK assassination.
    Another loose end is of course the girl with the polka dot dress. Who was she? where did she go? Here is one authors novel assessment: http://www.surfs-up.net/Downloads/RFK.pdf If this writer is correct, the ADL also played a role in the silencing of the polka dot dress girl.

    • Thanks: Laurent Guyénot
  62. The author is incorrect in stating that RFK was shot on June 6. He was shot on June 5.

  63. EuroNat says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    For what it’s worth, another possibility not mentioned nor considered yet by any “conspiracists” is the use of a certain vegetable extract known as burundanga – from the Angel’s trumpet, AKA Brugmansia – commonly used in Colombia to rob and rape people.

    The routine consists of basically having a prostitute to spike the drink of a victim with this extract, which is more or less purified scopolamine – an extremely powerful substance, 10 to 30 mg orally are enough render the victim absolutely submissive… to the point of helping thieves to carry the victim’s TVs, HIFI and other multimedia equipment out of the victim’s appartments and into the thiefs vans, and even telling neighbours and doormen that they were just simply moving out. Victims have reportedly gone to banks and personally withdrawed all cash. Victims had tipically no recollection of anything that happened to them in the several hours prior to the drug’s effect wearing off.

    Thiefs have told on interviews with investigative reporters that victims become a mix between docile children and alzheimers patients. “Confused” was an oft repeated adjective to describe the victims state of mind.

    Vice made a documentary years ago that can easily be found on the internet, “worlds scariest drug” was titled if memory serves me. Here’s also some safety advice for travelers to Colombia, proof of how common this is:

    https://www.worldnomads.com/travel-safety/south-america/colombia/drugs-in-colombia

    Now could someone be ordered to kill someone else while high on scopolamine? I have read of no reports. But one thing is clear, a hypnotized like state – in which victims blindly follow directions from strangers – can be induced chemically.

  64. @Joe Levantine

    Unfortunately, it’s not the fault of a free/unfree media. The fault is due to the stupidity of the audience, 75% of which got the wrong answer; 25% the correct answer. Sadly, that’s about par for the course.

  65. Rurik says:
    @Laurent Guyénot

    The Kennedys did not bring black slaves to America. Nor did their ancestors, I suspect. Since your WASP ancestors did it, desegregation was inevitable, and so were all kinds of trouble.

    karma and comeuppance, huh?

    If somewhere you had an ancestor anywhere who wronged someone, then You deserve to suffer for what they did!

    This is why Paris in particular, and France and Europe in general, are only reaping what the French people sowed by colonizing (and often enslaving) black and brown and yellow people.

    When Algerian men gang rape and brutalize a French girl in Paris, someone needs to tell her what karma looks like, as the poor dear is wiping away her tears.

    How many Algerians were brutalized by the French?!

    And so who should care one whit when a French girl is simply reaping what she sowed?

    She should have thought about that before she colonized Algeria and enslaved blacks!

  66. Bob says:

    This book describes other forms of Jewish violence that somehow always remain under the radar of skilled researchers: Mountebank’s Monster and His Mom https://scarsvale.net/

    I dare not estimate how many thousands have experienced this sort of violence, which causes severe damage through poisoning, maiming, and psychosurgery. Family, friends, and colleagues of victims of this treatment almost never notice the cause. But rather attribute sudden or gradual changes for the worse to drugs, alcohol, psychological problems, failed marriages, etc. I am sure many readers of UR have experienced this themselves or know someone who has. The ultimate goal is to destroy a people and seize control of their nation. It just takes a few generations of this kind of warfare. Typically, victims are talented children or young people who are destroyed before they become functioning adults. Rather than contribute, they become a burden on their communities.

    The opioid/fentanyl crisis appears to be another form of this kind of warfare with the addition of Chinese actors. Palestinian children shot in the knees with real bullets or in the eyes with rubber ones are another clear example of this strategy.

    See this for a more detailed explanation of the strategy: Military thought experiment Part 1
    https://americanbuddhist.net/2019/08/19/military-thought-experiment-part-1/

  67. Jiminy says:

    After JFK jr died there was a toxic eulogy of sorts written in one of the newspapers there in the US, and it was pretty savage. I believe it was taken down but not before somebody saved it to some dark recess of the Internet. I followed links in a story to read it so I can’t find it now though unfortunately. But it proved just how hated the Kennedy’s still were at that point in time by people in the media.
    It’s strange how the Kennedy clan seems to have a lot of bad luck follow them around.
    It’s the same with JFK’s murder, that after all these decades the full evidence has never been released because it’s obviously so damning and incriminating.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    , @S
    , @Patrick McNally
  68. @Richard B

    “The entire Middle East dances to their tune. Or, if they don’t, is unable to defeat them.”
    Not oly in the MENA, Richard B.
    The “patriotic” right-wingers here in Sweden – who unsurprisingly have Israel’s flag in their Twitter profile, are convinced that Arabs killed the JFK and his brother because of the Kennedy’s love for Israel and the Jewish people. No point to argue with them, if one doesn’t wish to be declared an anti-Semite, as most Swedes believe that Jews and Israel are, unlike Sweden’s current government- pro-White, because “Jews are fighting against Arabs”. This outlook is shared by Sweden’s “nationalist” party, Sweden Democrats (Sverigedemokraterna), whoze high representative, Björn Söder, the other week had critisized Sweden’s government for not hoisting Israel’s flag. According to the above mentioned Björn Söder, Sweden should this way express its solidarity with the Jewish people.
    The highly confusing thing in it is that the by Jews owned MSM media never stop ranting about Sweden Democrat party being “fascist”. Some Swedes are even brainwashed enough to swallow the in the alternative media’s commentary section popular opinion on Israel being a Christian country.

    • Replies: @James Forrestal
  69. I do have to agree that there is a good strong point there, but how far it will get in toddy’s really charged politics with other important factors?

  70. Iris says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    Wow. That has to be the most unperceptive comment ever by an UR author, Godfree.

    You just blew up your entire intellectual credibility with such a misguided paragraph on such an important topic.

  71. @EuroNat

    1. The effects of scopolamine, as presented, are interesting; but I suspect that they are greatly sensationalised in the reporting you provided – I don’t know. Perhaps I will find some and take it myself to see.

    2. I like the phenomena which surround “automatic writing” and “automatic speech”. The article mentions it, which is fun, but its existence provides good evidence that scopolamine was not involved.

    3. I can push people into their automatic voice; which I sometimes do, as I find it reveals truths that they have hidden from themselves. This can help them.

    I’ve never seen it do anything else, even when, in the past, I noticed myself speaking that way.

    I don’t believe the inner voice lies; though sometimes inner truths seem contradictory. Like the Oracle at Delphi.

    • Replies: @Jiminy
  72. @Laurent Guyénot

    And Ted was perhaps murdered, lethal injection, at an opportune time…to protect Obama…by changing the news cycle during hot boring August when Cindy Sheehan had come to protest warmonger Obama on Martha’s Vineyard….

  73. Iris says:
    @Rurik

    Dear Rurik; Laurent is not anti-White.

    The overwhelming majority of White French people in mainland France were against colonisation.
    When asked by General de Gaulle in the January 8th, 1961 Referendum about the Independence of Algeria, they voted at 75% in favour of ending the colonisation.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1961_French_referendum_on_Algerian_self-determination

    The ordinary White French people never gained from either slavery or colonialism, two morally-inacceptable practices that enriched only a tiny oligarchy. As such, French people don’t have neither to apologise, nor to condone those practices.

    In particular, the 1830 colonial expedition against Algeria was deliberately planned and organised by a handful of Hebraic bankers, who dragged corrupt French military in their enterprise. The story is known, and was told by great reporter Pierre Pean. Best.

    • Agree: Lucy Lipinska
    • Thanks: Rurik
    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @Rurik
  74. Agent76 says:

    November 23, 2019 JFK, MLK, RFK, 50 Years of Suppressed History: New Evidence on Assassination of John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King and Robert F. Kennedy Failures to Confront the Unspeakable, and The Way Ahead. Part I

    Today November 22, 2019, we commemorate the passing of JFK. November 22, 1963, the assassination of JFK in Dallas, Texas. Fifty-six years ago. January 21, 2019. Martin Luther King Day

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/50-years-of-suppressed-history-new-evidence-on-the-assassination-of-john-f-kennedy-martin-luther-king-and-robert-f-kennedy/5329847

  75. bayviking says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    Did you forget to mention that JFK was also planning to restore the Department of Treasury, as the issuer of US currency backed by silver certificates? Even more interesting is the fact that that JFK and RFK were feeding an internal Cuban coup, triggered by the assassination of Castro, which never happened. The need to keep Cuban General Almeida’s name above suspicion hindered a legitimate investigation.

    The notion that Siran Siran, James Earl Ray or Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone is a fiction driven by Richard Helms and J Edgar Hoover preserving their careers and the need for protecting a coup attempt, which was supposed to have been initiated by Almeida, led to a cover-up, the scale of which has never been fully exposed. Millions of Government documents remain redacted, unreleased or completey destroyed. But enough has been released to reach a better understanding of those terrible events.

    All three were assassinated in a conspiracy led by mob bosses Carlos Marcello, Johnny Rosseli and Santos Trafficante, with Marcello being the driver behind MLK’s death. A racist named Milteer paid Marcello $300,000 to kill MLK. Today most of the country celebrates Martin Luther King day as a national holiday and many streets have been renamed after him. But J Edgar Hoover declared MLK to be the most dangerous man in America, a communist and disruptor of the peace. The FBI tailed MLK 24/7 and sought to actively destroy his credibility, organization and family.

    The Kennedy brothers certainly provided these mob bosses the motive when they began aggressively investigating and prosecuting their crimes. They have long held the means of assassination at a distance with just a comment and wink to the right person. This was demonstrated over and over again while the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA)was active, as 9 people were killed before they could testify before the HSCA could get them to testify under oath including Sam Giancana and Jimmy Hoffa.

    That Frank Mankiewicz insisted that Robert go the unusual path through the pantry is an inersting piece to the puzzle. It has long been known that there were more bullet holes at the scene of RFK’s assassination than Siran Siran had bullets in his gun. That simple fact discredits the CIA and FBI entirely. Two of Siran Siran’s brothers peddled heroin for Johnny Roselli in LA.

    How do we know who assassinated JFK today, a wire tap in Marcello’s prison cell and confessions to their lawyers by Roselli and Trafficante revealed after their death. Hundreds of books covering hundreds of thousands of pages document the cover-up from a variety of perspectives. They all tend to peddle a favorite narrow storyline some involving Johnson or Mossad . None make as much sense as the three mobsters did it.

  76. Leo Den says:
    @RoatanBill

    How do you know he pulled the trigger?

    THEY say he did.

    THEY also said that 12 cavemen blew up the Pentagon and World Trade Center.

    Laughable. Really.

    http://biblicisminstitute.wordpress.com/2014/09/18/israels-dark-age-of-terror/

  77. Ron Unz says:
    @Jiminy

    After JFK jr died there was a toxic eulogy of sorts written in one of the newspapers there in the US, and it was pretty savage. I believe it was taken down but not before somebody saved it to some dark recess of the Internet. I followed links in a story to read it so I can’t find it now though unfortunately. But it proved just how hated the Kennedy’s still were at that point in time by people in the media.

    Actually, the ferocious attack on the Kennedys following the death of JFK, Jr. was written by John Podhoretz, a leading Neocon scion and Opinion Editor of the NY Post, where it appeared. I discussed it and included a link at the bottom of the section providing my own analysis of the Kennedy assassinations in early 2020:

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-mossad-assassinations/#final-judgment-on-the-jfk-assassination

    It’s entirely mistaken to suggest that it reflected any general hostility to the family in the MSM overall.

    • Agree: Lucy Lipinska
  78. RE: “Just hours after Robert’s assassination, the press informed the American people, not only of the identity of the assassin, but also of his motive, and even of his detailed biography.”

    That is what I remember about Lee Harvey Oswald, right after the assassination of John Kennedy: within a short period of time the America public “knew all about” Lee Harvey Oswald.

    I was 11 when JFK was shot. It is indelible: from the day of the assassination to the funeral. The funeral drum cadence was imprinted on my brain. And, of course, Lee Harvey Oswald was a “pro Castro commie!”

    So it repeats itself with RFK’s assassination.

  79. Rurik says:
    @Iris

    Dear Iris,

    Laurent is not anti-White.

    I generally enjoy his articles and his comments.

    My comment was directed at that one particular (and tiresome and nauseating) smear – “Since your WASP ancestors did it,”.. blah, blah, blah..

    The ordinary White French people never gained from either slavery or colonialism

    but ordinary “WASP”s did?

    Slavery was an institution of the rich, and the poor white men suffered because of it. Just like immigration today. Not to mention the hundreds of thousands of poor white men who died putting an end to the abhorrent institution.

    As such, French people don’t have neither to apologise, nor to condone those practices.

    Neither do white Americans.

    Hardly!

    But I’ve noticed something from the French, and there’s a kind of myopic arrogance and vile hypocrisy when it comes to white Americans. (or National Socialist Germans, the other whipping boy of our times).

    They sometimes like to puff themselves up and prance their ‘moral superiority’, because unlike the French, who kept their black slaves in colonies, average (non-wealthy) whitey had it imposed upon him on these shores, and so they belive they’re entitled to preen and posture their sanctimonious moral ‘superiority’, vis-a-vis white Americans (WASPs)

    I honestly don’t know if Mr. Guyénot is guilty of that or not. I’ve read some of his stuff and liked what I read, but that shot he took at Alden (‘WASPs did it, so WASPs deserve to pay’) struck me as very typical of the French.

    • Agree: Lucy Lipinska
    • Thanks: Iris
  80. JFK and RFK forced at military assault rifle gunpoint integration on White Deep South Women.

    If JFK was alive in 1965….He would have signed the 1965 Immigration Reform Act into Law…

    • Replies: @Alden
  81. @Franklin Ryckaert

    Psychologically speaking, we Irish-Americans are kinda like Jews, often harboring a neurotic tendency towards repressed/dissembling self-loathing.

    (…and like black people, many of us have embraced a culture of victimhood to the point where we are defensively proud of our heritage… despite so much of it consisting of substance abuse, profligacy, domestic abuse, broken homes, criminal behavior, unemployment, urban terrorism, conspicuous religious hypocrisy, etc).

    Obviously I’m guilty of a bit of self-loathing myself, but mostly it just comes out as a pet peeve about St. Patrick’s Day and the kind of people who have knot and/or claddagh fetishes and listen to half-assed Celtic-flavored punk rock.

    But at least I don’t have an irrational hatred for the Kennedys.

    • Replies: @Gaspar DeLaFunk
  82. Jiminy says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    I think it takes a brave person, or perhaps crazy to say that they may test the chemical out on themselves. It is used as a motion sickness drug in small dose patches and also before surgical operations to dry up the patients saliva output.
    Here years ago youths made a tea with the flowers and they were temporarily blinded, amongst other things. Once you recognise the tree you realise that it seems to grow everywhere. The very long dangling white trumpet like flowers are easily recognisable.
    The dried and ground up seeds are blown into the face of the victim. It doesn’t take a lot to send you off to la-la land. So if you’re going through with your experiment make sure you have friends there to care for you, for you could be out of it for days.
    Maybe there is some truth in drugs being used to influence victims thinking as here a researcher has investigated whether or not the chemical can be used to sway people’s minds, being used as a type of mind control drug.

    • Thanks: Triteleia Laxa
  83. The real murderers won’t escape God’s Judgment on Judgment Day, and they will be destroyed in the Lake of Fire. False flags go back hundreds of years. Another false flag that many miss was Kristallnaught. The precipitating cause to start up WW2.

  84. @Anon

    Terrorists are crazy people and one even managed to hurl his passport out of a window less airplane that had crashed into the World Trade Center.
    Americans are brilliant too. Two shots fired into his body from behind and under the armpit and another into the brain also from behind and Poor hyptonised Sirhan Sirhan is the murderer.
    Americans, you all are an occupied people. You all are powerless people.

    • Agree: Peripatetic Itch
  85. Z-man says:
    @RoatanBill

    Roatan Bill wins the debate!
    Sirhan-Sirhan shot RFK.
    Question though; If Sirhan is a Christian shouldn’t he have a Christian first name?

    On a side note; The Zionists arrested but then released two Palestinian activists (a brother & sister) against land theft in Jerusalem. I would assume the Zio-beast was put under some pressure from the sleepy Joe administration to release them. But nevertheless very little coverage in the Zionist controlled media.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
    , @Alden
  86. @Ghali

    Just today I saw on YouTube an episode of an Iranian (Persian) king who traveled through Europe (Germany, Prussia, Russia, France and England).
    During his stay in Paris, a Rothschild visited him. The Persian King remarked upon his riches and advised him to buy a small country and get all his co-coreligionists together. Mr Rothschild laughed at this and so did the king.
    Was the seed for Israel sown by Persia??

  87. gay troll says:
    @Iris

    How much “intellectual credibility” can you expect from someone who pivoted from writing get rich quick books to licking the boots of the CCP?

  88. ko says:

    watch:

    Evidence of Revision

    Everything is a Rich Man’s Trick

    The Power Principle

    Be sure to get the original versions. May edited copies exist and they pretend to be originals, but they have critical information missing.

  89. Rurik says:
    @Iris

    btw Iris,

    I heartily agree with this part

    The Kennedys are important because a rational, comparative study of their murders reveals the ugly truth behind the smoke screen of the “Kennedy curse”, and exposes the deep power that has enslaved America ever since.

    if they could get away with assassinating JFK, they I guess they figured the USS Liberty would be a walk, and then 9/11, and so on…

    for instance, would JFK had recalled the jets that were scrambled to assist the Liberty?

    He may have been corrupt and anti-white and other egregious things, but something tells me he wasn’t such a treasonous rat to allow our “allies” to murder our sailors with impunity.

    I suspect that he a shred of patriotism from some of the things he said. Like his speech on secret societies being un-American.

    • Agree: Peripatetic Itch
  90. utu says:

    June 5, 1968: The Last Hours of RFK
    https://nymag.com/news/politics/47041/

    While we waited in 516 for the polls to close and the returns to come in, I talked for a while with the movie director John Frankenheimer. The advertising agency Papert, Koenig, Lois, Inc., had hired him in March to work with the Kennedy campaign on shooting promotional material, including some commercials. He and Kennedy had become friends, and the candidate had spent the night before in Frankenheimer’s home in Malibu. On this Tuesday, Frankenheimer had driven Kennedy to the Ambassador, where they arrived around 7:30 p.m. Like me, Frankenheimer was a native New Yorker, and I noticed that he referred to Kennedy as Bob, as I did. Where we came from, people named “Bobby” were either 9 years old or professional ballplayers. We talked a bit about the town that spawned us, and then about Frankenheimer’s great paranoid masterwork from 1962, The Manchurian Candidate, which starred Frank Sinatra and Laurence Harvey. It had been withdrawn from public viewing after the killing of Jack Kennedy in 1963 (it would finally be rereleased in 1988). The story, based on a novel by Richard Condon, was about programming a man to assassinate a presidential candidate.

  91. @Z-man

    I have no idea, nor do I care, what religious affiliation the man claims. It’s irrelevant to his deed.

    I don’t think Sirhan actually fired a bullet that hit RFK, but again, I don’t care about his ability to aim at a target. The mere fact that he tried to shoot at another person that had done him no personal harm means the man is a predator and needs to be killed, not clothed, housed, fed and provided medical care from the taxpayers pockets.

    I would leave it up to RFK’s family to decide on the actual punishment with the proviso that if they let him go, they become responsible for his future actions. That’s why I think parole boards, prosecutors and judges should be held responsible for any crime past the first the felon was convicted of. I’d make them accessories to murder or whatever charge could legitimately be placed on a recidivist.

    The criminal justice system encourages recidivism and actively protects the criminals in the society from the true justice they deserve.

    • Troll: Mulga Mumblebrain
  92. Mike321 says:
    @Chris Mallory

    JFK was no more a “papist” than I am. He was born into a catholic family. Period. So what? Name one policy he ever advocated that was “papist” in any way.

  93. bayviking says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    One question: Who are the two people Johnson allegedly had killed on his way to the Senate?

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  94. In today’s 1984 v.c2.1 world, we’re now ruled by Bolshevik Mossad agents disguised as techno tyrants, jnews anchors, Wall Street robber barons, ad nausea. They don’t do public assassinations like in days of yore.
    Today it’s a clean operation whereby anyone they dislike are banned, censored and cut off from any means to a dignified livelihood. Trump being a billionaire was only censored for life.
    As long as the children of Satan continue in the tradition of deception of their father the devil by the political power afforded to them through the governing bodies of the secular state of Satan (((Israel))), there will be no peace in the valley of righteousness.
    The goy will continue to be replaced, targeted for bankruptcy, false imprisonment, sterilized and made weak until they exist no more.
    And just like sheep rounded up for slaughter, the goy will follow.

  95. Chris Moore says: • Website
    @Rurik

    When Algerian men gang rape and brutalize a French girl in Paris, someone needs to tell her what karma looks like, as the poor dear is wiping away her tears.

    She’s paying for the sins of the Jew-collaborating Ole’ Boys Club and its Zionist agenda of systemic theft and enslavement. She’s paying for the sin of liberal “tolerance” for the Judeofascists.

    If the Globalist-Zionist Ole’ Boys Club (Imperialism) had never partnered with the Jewish element, and if greedy and power-mad useful idiot French “liberals” hadn’t pretended the Jew was persecuted and demanded “tolerance” (to leverage the “victim” card and gain power and filthy lucre for their gang by aping the Jewish narrative) the Algerians would never have set foot on the European continent.

    In a way, the French are paying for the bad karma that inevitably follows “tolerance” for Zionists and their evil agenda of world conquest.

    The question is, when will they expel the entire “6,000 Year Old Earth” club from European soil, including “Christians” who failed to follow the philosophy of Jesus, stopped evolving (challenging authoritarian Zionist sociopaths), and let the soulless Jewish leaches, well-poisoners and hypocrite didactics infiltrate advanced civilization?

    • Replies: @Alden
    , @Rurik
  96. @Rurik

    If somewhere you had an ancestor anywhere who wronged someone, then You deserve to suffer for what they did!

    That’s an interesting theory.
    But I was not talking is such general terms: WASP colons in America brought in African slaves as if they were machines, but it turned out that they were human beings. They descendants now have to deal with it. Call it karma if you will. But that is a fact.

    • Agree: Mulga Mumblebrain
    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @Dr. Warren
    , @Paul C.
  97. anonymous[139] • Disclaimer says:

    A .22 caliber pistol wouldn’t be the first choice for an assassination since it’s at the low end of the caliber spectrum. Sure, it worked but going in a capable assassin would have picked a heavier caliber which means the shooter wasn’t very knowledgeable about guns. A hypnotized assassin would have been given something heavier, like a .38, by his handlers who would presumably have been more gun savvy. It indicates some half-baked opportunist packing what he can.
    Sirhan and Cesar seem unlikely co-conspirators. To try to assassinate a major public figure so up close and in the midst of a crowd is obviously a one way mission. Cesar hardly fits the mold of a suicide assassin. Sirhan is not the first perpetrator of a major crime such as murder who states they have memory issues regarding the actual event.
    Although RFK may not have seemed particularly Israel-friendly there’s no indication he would have taken a hostile stance once in office. There’s more than just the president involved in setting foreign policy. He could have been pressured and blackmailed into being compliant rather than risking such a drastic action.

  98. ingotus says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    You wrote:

    Yet the group you accuse has not even been able to deal with the Palestinians. In the meantime, countless peace settlements, successful ethnic cleansings, large scale massacres, and more, have taken place around the world, ignored and/or forgiven.

    I sympathize with your skepticism. Perhaps you are right. But I wonder in what ways you think the world would be different if that group indeed was as powerful and ruthless as you deem it cannot be. I suspect it wouldn’t, not much anyway. They seem to have a much longer range perspective than most of us.

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  99. Bravo to Unz for reprinting this one. I have never believed the official story regarding the RFK assassination.

    Incidentally I was very close to the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles when it happened. I was visiting my grandmother’s house located only a block away. I saw the crowds on Wilshire Blvd., but I didn’t know why the crowds were there until later that night.

    This is tangential, but since we are taking about Palestinians and false flags, I accuse the Mossad of blowing up Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie Scotland. I clearly remember where I was and what I was doing the day of the bombing. Israel watchers immediately knew that either Mossad or the Sayeret Matkal (Israeli Special Forces) did it.

    I have studied this case in depth, and I don’t have space here to explain all the details, so I will focus on the motive…

    On 21 December 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 (a 747) blew up, killing all 259 passengers and crew-members aboard, including 189 U.S. citizens.

    Falling wreckage killed another 11 people on the ground in Lockerbie Scotland, bringing total deaths to 270.

    WHAT WAS ISRAEL’S MOTIVE FOR THE MURDERS?

    [MORE]

    On Tuesday 13 December 1988, Yasser Arafat surprised everyone by suddenly acknowledging Israel’s right “to exist in peace and security.”

    The following day Arafat publicly repudiated “terrorism in all its forms,” and announced that he would visit the UN headquarters to explain his peace plan.

    This would be Arafat’s first visit to the UN, and he planned to ask Israel to please abide by UN Security Council Resolution 242, which required Jews to withdraw to pre-1967 boundaries in Palestine.

    Arafat’s about-face excited the Western world, and it was front-page news in the Western media. Peace finally seemed at hand in Palestine.

    This quickly hemorrhaged into a propaganda crisis for Israel. Jews staged mass demonstrations outside the UN building in New York to protest Arafat’s planned visit. The Israeli government did everything possible to stop Arafat from coming, but U.S. President Bush Sr. did not bow to Jewish threats. Bush decreed that Arafat would be allowed to speak at the UN on 13 Dec 88.

    Arafat’s speech at the UN brought a standing ovation.

    PEACE AT LAST! PEACE AT LAST!

    This too was front-page news around the world, and it threw Israel into total crisis mode. The Jews were losing their battles in occupied Lebanon (during the civil war), and the whole world now believed that Arafat was sincere in his peace efforts. Israel became desperate to shift the world focus back to “Palestinian terrorists.”

    Therefore, eight days after Arafat’s speech at the UN, Mossad planted one pound of plastic explosive in the forward cargo hold of Pan Am Flight 103 at London’s Heathrow airport. The bomb in the cargo hold was small, and only caused a hole that was 20-inches wide, but the explosive decompression led to a cascade of events that quickly caused the 747 to disintegrate over Lockerbie Scotland.

    Israel wanted to bomb any airliner full of Americans, but decided on Pan Am Flight 103 because that particular flight offered a bonus: its passengers included Matthew Gannon (the CIA’s deputy station chief in Beirut), plus Major Chuck McKee (an army officer working for the US Defense Intelligence Agency in Beirut), plus two US Diplomatic Security Service special agents: Ronald Lariviere (a security officer from the U.S. Embassy in Beirut) and Daniel O’Connor (a security officer from the U.S. Embassy in Nicosia, Cyprus). All four of these US intelligence officials had reported on non-stop Jewish atrocities in Israeli-occupied Lebanon.

    Israel decided that they had to be silenced.

    The Israeli plan was to destroy Flight 103 over the ocean so that all evidence of the Israeli bomb would be lost, however bad weather caused the 747 pilot to divert north to Scotland.

    After the Israelis destroyed the plane, Israeli media blamed Arafat and Palestinians.

    “See? Arafat’s speech was only a ruse! You can’t trust Palestinians!” (A few Israelis blamed Hezbollah, the new group in Lebanon that was defeating Israel during the civil war.)

    To seal the deal, Israel offered Pan Am the perfect man to “investigate” the bombing: Yuval Aviv, a Mossad bomb expert who had become a US citizen. Mr. Aviv’s pretend “investigation” would conclude that the bombing was done by Arafat’s and Ahmad Jibril’s Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC).

    However for the US government at this time, the top villain was Libya, and Mummar Qaddafi. The U.S. government claimed (with zero proof) that the bombing in 1988 was Qaddafi’s retaliation for US air strikes on Libya in 1986.

    Also at this time, anti-Libya rhetoric filled the U.S. media and movies. Everywhere Libyans were the villains of choice. In the first “Back to the Future” movie, Christopher Lloyd’s character is shot by Libyan terrorists.

    The US government ended up blaming Libya for Mossad’s bombing of Pan Am Flight 103. Israelis were not happy about this, and to this day, many Israelis still insist that Palestinians did the Mossad bombing.

    I will substantiate my claims with many more details if anyone cares to challenge me.

    • Thanks: Peripatetic Itch
    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
    , @Sirius
  100. Alden says:
    @Z-man

    Sirhan was an Arab and had an Arab name. Chinese Korean Persian Syrian other Arab Christians don’t necessarily have Muslim names. Just as American and European atheists Catholics Jews and Protestants have the same names.

    Read any biography or Wikipedia entry and the corroborate his family was Greek Orthodox for centuries. As a Christian whose family remained Christian after the Muslim conquest his family very probably was descended from ancestors who lived in Palestine 2,000 years ago. He had several brothers and they had children. It’s very probable the Sirhan family has ancient Canaanite Jewish DNA, unlike the Russian invaders.

    For those who believe American Jews didn’t like John Kennedy, fun fact. A higher percentage of Jews voted for John Kennedy than Catholics voted for him.

    And Robert Kennedy’s marching in MLK’s funeral , other civil rights for all but Whites demonstrations, his Hispanic activism and alliance with Cesar Chavez, disdain for the White working class and increasing radicalism made him the great shining hero of American jews. I’m old enough to remember all the radical Weatherman type jews just about worshipping Bobby as they called him.

    Sirhan had an excellent motive he was in the room less than 2 feet from Kennedy and he did shoot his gun. And he confessed.

    If you’ve ever been around a politician surrounded by people clamoring to shake hands and exchange a few words, you would know their heads, shoulders arms and hands are constantly moving and twisting as they try to shake hands and say hello to as many people as possible.

    I’ve been around politicians at events and that’s how it always is.

    Maybe Thane Cesar Killed Kennedy. But even the most brainwashed Kennedy worshipper can’t deny Sirhan had an excellent motive, he was very close to Kennedy and he did shoot a gun at Kennedy.

    Israel had no motive to kill Robert Kennedy. He had just promised Israel all the military help they requested. American president Vice President debate and congressional elections consist of all the candidates competing to give Israel and American blacks more than the other candidates. They’re like hungry puppies begging for food

    • Replies: @Z-man
  101. @ingotus

    I sympathize with your skepticism. Perhaps you are right. But I wonder in what ways you think the world would be different if that group indeed was as powerful and ruthless as you deem it cannot be. I suspect it wouldn’t, not much anyway. They seem to have a much longer range perspective than most of us.

    If that group were as powerful and ruthless as they are imagined, then Israel would include Jordan, the Sinai, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

    You argue that perhaps it does not, because they have a longer range perspective, but, for a group that powerful and ruthless, establishing sovereignty over such tiny portions of the globe would be easy.

    The British Empire remade the globe. They transferred populations at whim. They did this any time they felt like. That is world power.

    Israel has had a messy scrap with the Palestinians, who are a minor subdivision of a people who have been completely ineffectual on the world stage for a thousand years. That is limited regional strength.

    • Replies: @Rich
    , @GazaPlanet
    , @Kramer
  102. Alden says:
    @Chris Moore

    If Algerian French men are allowed to gang bang french people as revenge for the Algerian colony, should t they be raping the men responsible for the colonization or the direct descendants of the colonizers? Or are they gang banging women because women are smaller and weaker than men?

    BTW read some history. The Algerians slave raided pirated and invaded France for a thousand years before France invaded Algeria and ended the Algerian piracy slave kidnapping and hit and run raids in France.

    Bet you went to college and learned all about the evils of White Europeans and the virtue and sanctity of Arab Muslims who never committed an immoral action since 650AD

    You know absolutely nothing about what Algerian Muslims did to Europe for a thousand years before France ended it.

    The mind of a liberal is an empty sink. Every once in a while liberal propaganda Central Committee pulls out the plug and drains the sink. Then puts the plug back in, turns on the faucet and fills the empty sink with the current correct thought.

    That’s the empty brain if a liberal. Total ignorance until filled with lies

    • Replies: @Chris Moore
    , @Colin Wright
  103. anarchyst says:
    @Leo Den

    Actually the CIA funds its “black projects” by the very lucrative (illegal) drug trade. CIA types have free-reign to bypass customs and just about every other form of government control and scrutiny.
    The “little guy” gets “pinched” for (illegal) drugs while government types do whatever they want.

  104. Alden says:
    @War for Blair Mountain

    I think that was Eisenhower when he sent the army to Arkansas and Kentucky. Even tanks to Kentucky.

    JFK March 1961 issued and executive mandating that all federal departments SHALL take affirmative action to hire blacks instead of Whites. We all know what affirmative action led to; extreme ferociously enforced discrimination against Whites.

    And the idiot liberals hero JFK was responsible for President Obama and VP Harris whom the elites plan to run in 2024. Obama’s father, Barack Sr and both Harris’ parents arrived in America as part of a third world foreign student program created by President Kennedy.

    Affirmative action, Obama and Harris thousands of other non White foreign Marxists studying and teaching in our great universities.

    I know many propagandize brainwashed boomers still worship Kennedy. But think what he did to Whites.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  105. @Anon

    “ FBI document warns conspiracy theories are a new domestic terrorism threat”.

    Ya mean like the Russia, Russia, Russia, White Supremacists are the greatest domestic threat, January 6th roundup of patriots attending a voter fraud rally, ad nausea…….the same bs they have been peddling since FBI’s founding?

    FBI Dick Wgay is as (((Woke))) as a wigger can be.

  106. @Sollipsist

    This may well be one of the stupidest comments ever printed in these august pages!

    • Replies: @Sollipsist
  107. Chris Moore says: • Website
    @Alden

    You know absolutely nothing about what Algerian Muslims did to Europe for a thousand years before France ended it.

    They’re just another element of the 6,000 Year Old Earth club. You’re apparently a liberal who loves the Jewish/Zionist element, but not the Muslims element. Keep grinding those axes Jew-loving liberal.

    The mind of a liberal is an empty sink. Every once in a while liberal propaganda Central Committee pulls out the plug and drains the sink. Then puts the plug back in, turns on the faucet and fills the empty sink with the current correct thought. That’s the empty brain if a liberal. Total ignorance until filled with lies

    I agree. That perfectly describes the Jew-loving liberal getting its empty head filled by the kosher cabal.

    Muh, 6000 Year Old Earth. Muh, give me some easy ZOG money.

    • Replies: @Alden
    , @James Forrestal
  108. anon[390] • Disclaimer says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    The Kennedys were undone by hubris.

    The items listed tell me they were great men who deserved to be leaders.

    We are a sorry nation because great men fell to rats.

  109. @anonymous

    The thing is, Sirhan was not meant to really murder somebody, he was meant to fake it. Therefore the right caliber of his pistol didn’t matter. Of course Cesar was not meant to be a suicide murderer either. His murder would be covered by Sirhan’s act.

    RFK was not murdered for his possible anti-Israel stand, he was murdered for his possible investigation of his brother’s murder.

    • Replies: @Patrick McNally
  110. Rurik says:
    @Laurent Guyénot

    WASP colons in America brought in African slaves as if they were machines, but it turned out that they were human beings. They descendants now have to deal with it. Call it karma if you will. But that is a fact.

    You mention WASPs as having used African slaves ‘as if they were machines’, as if such a thing is somehow unique to WASPs, when every educated person knows very well that the French were just as guilty of enslaving Africans ‘as if they were machines’, as so-called ‘WASPs’ were.

    and ‘dealing with it’ is one thing

    having the ‘guilt’ of something a seventeenth century man did, (in a time when it was common for seventeenth century people to enslave each other, white, brown and black), placed on the shoulders of modern people- who had nothing whatsoever to do with slavery, other than suffer its consequences, is a vile thing for anyone to do.

    No one should try to judge an fifth century man (or nineteenth), based on 21st century morality.

    Doing so would be ignorant and smug.

    And certainly no intelligent person would ever try to impugn or malign any particular race or nation for something so utterly commonplace as slavery, throughout human history.

    If anything, it was America that was willing to fight a bloody war to put an end to the institution.

    And if you check the timeline, it was the WASP nations who ratified the 1926 Slavery Convention abolishing slavery in all their jurisdictions, from 1953 to 1956, while France didn’t bother to do so until 1963.

    The point being, no one has a right to smear the character of another person based on historical ‘crimes’, that weren’t even crimes at the time. Least of all the French, when it comes to slavery or colonialism.

    The elites of England and France and America certainly are criminal psychopaths with the blood of innocents on their hands. All anyone needs to do is look at Libya today to see that.

    But as America struggles with the legacy of slavery, thoughtful people should all agree that the solution to this, is not blaming the current population of European-descended peoples, unless they ignore the log in their own eyes. And stupidly endeavor to exacerbate the racial strife that we’re all dealing with. IMHO.

    • Thanks: Mike Tre
    • Replies: @Laurent Guyénot
  111. Rurik says:
    @Chris Moore

    In a way, the French are paying for the bad karma that inevitably follows “tolerance” for Zionists and their evil agenda of world conquest.

    yes, but if you can preen at how much more noble and kosher you are compared to evil Germans or ‘racist’ Americans, doesn’t that make seeing your ancient country descend into a shithole of diversity, racial strife and hatred.. worth it?

    • Replies: @Chris Moore
  112. Ron Unz says:
    @anonymous

    A .22 caliber pistol wouldn’t be the first choice for an assassination since it’s at the low end of the caliber spectrum…A hypnotized assassin would have been given something heavier, like a .38…

    Sirhan and Cesar seem unlikely co-conspirators. To try to assassinate a major public figure so up close and in the midst of a crowd is obviously a one way mission. Cesar hardly fits the mold of a suicide assassin.

    Not really. Under this reconstruction, Sirhan’s attack was merely intended as a distraction, allowing RFK to be shot from behind by the real assassin. And the plan worked perfectly, in exactly that way.

    Although RFK may not have seemed particularly Israel-friendly there’s no indication he would have taken a hostile stance once in office. There’s more than just the president involved in setting foreign policy. He could have been pressured and blackmailed into being compliant rather than risking such a drastic action.

    But foreign policy obviously wasn’t the primary motive for the assassination. If RFK had become president, one of his top priorities would have been to seriously investigate the assassination of his older brother, and bring the culprits to justice. So RFK was killed in order to protect the elements behind the JFK assassination.

  113. Rurik says:
    @Alden

    I know many propagandize brainwashed boomers still worship Kennedy.

    the best metric I have for judging the quality of public people these days is based on how much wokeness hates them.

    That’s basically the only good thing Trump has going for him, is that they seem to harbor a singular hatred for him. So he can’t be all that bad.

    If they hate a man enough to assassinate him, I can’t help wonder at perhaps some redeeming qualities.

    They all have to toe the anti-white line. Zionists (genocidal, anti-white zealots) were handed the keys to this nation’s destiny when Woodrow Wilson handed them the keys to the U.S. Treasury.

    But perhaps JFK was a reluctant stooge. Unlike Johnson or our current crop.

    Consider for instance Ron Paul. It is generally agreed that if he had won the Republican nomination and was headed to the presidency, then with a certainty ((they)) would have assassinated him. That’s just one way (if true) to see what a good and honorable and patriotic guy Dr. Paul was/is.

    It seems it’s sort of come to that. If someone is actually an honest and decent person, who’s also a public figure, if they can’t destroy or imprison or banish them with threats of torture (Assange, Snowden), then their next step is to outright ‘JFK’ them. Like they did to Saddam and Gadhafi, for instance, when those fellows became inconvenient to Zion. That they’d like to do that to Putin, is as obvious as the nose on their faces.

    But then Vlad isn’t an American politician, subject to the ‘protection’ of our federal law enforcement and Secret Service.

  114. Z-man says:
    @Alden

    American president Vice President debate and congressional elections consist of all the candidates competing to give Israel and American blacks more than the other candidates. They’re like hungry puppies begging for food

    Sad but true.

  115. Alden says:
    @Chris Mallory

    Mallory is the Welsh version of the grand old Irish name O’ Malley. The Mallorys of Wales are actually descendants of a clan of the Irish O’Malley tribe who were deported to Wales around 1200 AD after being found guilty of cattle rustling kidnapping and extortion. Just kidding.

  116. Alden says:
    @Colin Wright

    Read any biography of Sirhan or my post # 28 that summarizes why Siirhan and his family had reason to hate American politicians loyal to Israel.

    At Pasadena community college there was an activist liberal Jewish group he disliked. He argued with a Jewish teacher about the occupation of Israel. He didn’t seem aware of the numerous Zionist organizations or Israeli business or diplomatic reps in Los Angeles at the time. He, his brothers and parents were very very bitter about the Israeli storm troopers who seized the family home and turned them out in 1948.

    Israel “ won” the 1967 war with a lot of help from the USA which added to the bitterness and hatred. And then Kennedy ran for president and promised even more help for Israel. And Kennedy was right there in town for the primary. Of all the presidential candidates Kennedy was the most famous. The lying media was full of the Kennedys Kennedys Kennedys for 50 years and its still going on. I doubt the lying media printed the locations of the voting day parties of the other candidates.

    I have no idea what Wikipedia says about Sirhan. No doubt it’s jewish propaganda It certainly won’t mention why the family left Palestine. I wonder what Russian Zionist lives there now?

    • Replies: @Mario Partisan
    , @Ron Unz
  117. @Rurik

    Stop projecting your fantasies onto JFK……I enjoy the JFK autopsy photos every Saint Patricks Day with:cornbeef….cabbage…potatos….and a six pack…..Go google the JFK autopsy photos….have fun….

    JFK did the dirty work of the ADL…..

    • LOL: Rurik
    • Replies: @Anonymous
  118. Alden says:
    @Laurent Guyénot

    Of course the Kennedys didn’t bring slaves to America. By the time Kennedy became President January 1961 segregation was finished. Unless you are a White hating liberal who thinks there should be a black in every residential block.

    All three Kennedy’s were anti White. Ted and Robert were just making speeches. But JFK issued an executive order mandating affirmative discrimination in government employment March 1961 less than 2 months after he became president. Think about that Has any French President ever issues an executive order mandating black Africans be hired for government employment instead of native White French?

    You’re not an American, you don’t know our history except the pro Marxist anti American history every European has been taught in school. And like a lot of naive gullible Americans you believe what the worshipful media write about the Kennedy’s from the 1930s on.

    Old Joe Kennedy was a master of publicity. He created a public relations campaign on behalf of his family that’s still going on 80 years after he hired Walter Winchell, Drew Pearson Walter Krock and hundreds of others.

    Kennedy was a carefully crafted actor and so was the whole family. Similar to the British royal family and their charities and 15,000 pound wedding dresses and baptisms and happy married couples. Or like the Bill Gates publicity machine that presents him as a philanthropist to disguise whatever he’s doing internationally.

    And there’s a lot more people in America other than the 13 percent of black criminals who have destroyed everyone one of our great cities, our state school system and everything they touch.

    Like other jumped up prole Europeans, you probably think George Floyd was an innocent angel murdered with malice afore thought by an evil WASP like me with a French name, perhaps a distant relative of yours. Floyd was a career criminal with no employment history, on parole who died of self ingested illegal drugs after being arrested for passing counterfeit money.

    Europeans all love American blacks And feel soo superior to Americans because America has slavery. I’ll say to you what I’ve said to every jumped up prole Brit about American slavery. The English brought Africans to America an English judge legalized slavery for blacks in 1654 and we stopped importing Africans in 1808.

    Ever heard of the slave colonies of Haiti Martinique Guadalupe Cayenne Devils Island Louisiana French colony and other Caribbean Islands? That’s France you American White hating ignoramus. Do French schools even teach about the French responsibility for populating the American states of Mississippi Alabama Louisiana Tennessee Kentucky Arkansas and Missouri with African slaves??

    I doubt it. Truth about American slavery is that European ignoramuses don’t know is that it was France and England that dumped African slaves on America. 750,000 White men died to free the slaves England and your country France dumped on us.

    And don’t call me a WASP, a racial slur invented by Jewish communists. My British DNA came back a bit of Welsh Irish and Scots but 60 percent Scandinavian. Which makes sense since my father’s surname is common in Yorkshire settled by Vikings.

    So get down on your knees and apologize to George Floyd’s criminal generations on welfare useless wasters of Oxygen and space for being responsible as a French man for bringing Africans to six southern states and the Caribbean. Not only is America plagued with our own blacks but Haitians.

    And acknowledge your guilt and apologize to every black person resident today in Louisiana Mississippi Alabama Tennessee Kentucky Arkansas and Missouri for the fact that France imported African slaves to those states.

    There’s a few books telling some of the truth about the Kennedys. A good one is The Dark Side Of Camelot a highly regarded NYTimes reporter. It’s not anti Kennedy at all. Just objective as all presidential biographies should be. Instead of the endless Lives of the Saint Kennedys you’ve been brainwashed with.

    I can trade “ what about “ history better than you. As you are so ignorant about the French role in American slavery.

    Affirmative action, anti White activism , aiding and abetting the blacks to destroy our great cities; that’s what I have against the Kennedys and every American President since Truman.

    • Replies: @Oldtradesman
  119. Alden says:
    @Chris Moore

    What are you blathering about?

    The thousand year old history of Algerians raiding southern France slave raiding and piracy against French shipping has nothing to do with the present Palestine vs Zionist mess.

    Historically, it was always always Muslims and Jews united against Christians from 700 AD till about 1900 . When British politicians became pro Zionist for various reasons including bribery blackmail the Suez canal plans to seize Turkish territory in any future war and other motives.

    What’s 6,000 years have to do with Algerian pirates invading France and France invading Algeria? It was 1,000 years of Algeria invading France and 130 years of France occupying Algeria. Not 6,000

    • Replies: @Chris Moore
  120. Rich says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    I don’t know, India is Hindu, Pakistan is Muslim, Hong Kong is Chinese, S Africa is African, Canada has a French named PM, the American colonies have an Irish Catholic president and even 26 of 32 Irish counties are independent. Whatever remaking the Brits did was undone some time ago. War guarantee to Poland was the dopiest move in their history.

    • Troll: Triteleia Laxa
  121. @Alden

    I feel you, I mean not only were the Kennedy’s n-word lovers, but also Irish Catholics to boot, so like, they were totally asking for it.

    That said, the facts that you present about Sirhan may be correct, and they do help engender sympathy for the guy. That said, they do not establish that he acted alone or was even the main actor in the assassination. In fact, if what Mr. Guyenot writes is true, then the bullet that killed RFK did not even come from Sirhan’s gun.

    I am of the belief that Sirhan was a patsy, set up to take the fall for the assassination. The fact that his background would give him a motive to kill RFK, does not mean that he did so, but it does mean that he makes a great patsy, because his back story can be used to pin the guilt on him.

    Think about Oswald – from my understanding, Oswald had been a US intel asset, working as an undercover “Communist” – hence his travel to the USSR, etc. However, once he was determined to be a disposable asset, his previous assignments could be used to set him up to take the fall for killing JFK.

    I think a very similar thing happened with some of the 11/9 patsies. Many of these individuals had verifiable back stories substantiating a jihadi cover story – they had been involved as indirect US assets as mujahedeen in Afghanistan or during the Balkan wars of the 1990s. They were probably brought to the US thinking they were on some assignment or being rewarded for their service with an “American experience.”

    Indeed, most of the visas they got were from the Jeddah, KSA consulate, which is known to facilitate visa procurement for Arabs with questionable resumes (a book was written about it some time ago, Visas for Al Qaeda, or something). A think anyone with a thinking brain at this point knows they didn’t bring down 3 towers in NY, but these documentable histories helped to pad the official story.

    In short, the FBI/CIA are smart enough to use people whose life stories fit with the narrative to be established. Pinning a high-profile assassination on some random “Thomas John English” whose been playing football and raising corn in Kansas his entirely life would be pretty dumb.

    • Replies: @anarchyst
  122. @Franklin Ryckaert

    Exactly. It was JFK who became embroiled in a fight with the Israel lobby over both Dimona and AIPAC. JFK wanted to stop the spread of WMDs to the Middle East by ending the Israeli nuclear program and he also saw the Israel-lobbying agencies as working for a foreign government without being properly registered as agents of said foreign government. JFK undoubtedly underestimated the level of hostility which this would invoke from the Israelis. As people have pointed out here, he was very popular among a lot of Jewish Democrats.

    Although the Israel lobby has always been a Jewish thing by definition, it has gone through ebbs and flows. After the Six Day War in 1967 there was a huge burst of enthusiasm among Jews worldwide for Israel. This energized the Israel lobby here in the US, as well as fed demands for Jews to migrate outside of the USSR. That surge lasted for about 4 decades. Since about 2007 you can see a lot of other conflicting trends. Black Lies Matter had made multiple statements against Israel and AIPAC. But they are given an extra latitude which a white person would never be allowed. This isn’t just crafty Machiavellianism. It reflects a real intellectual confusion among many Jews about just what do they really want.

    During JFK’s years in office the Israel lobby was a real thing, but it seemed small enough that you wouldn’t expect to hear about a paper by John Mearsheimer & Stephen Walt on it. Huge numbers of ordinary Jews didn’t seem to pay much attention to it. So JFK just kind of wandered his way into a big conflict without realizing what a kettle of worms he was opening up. When RFK ran for office the important thing about him was not any specific stance which he took on issues. It was just the very fact that anyone who looked at him as a candidate was thinking about investigating the JFK case. The Mossad could not allow that to happen.

    • Replies: @James Forrestal
  123. Chris Moore says: • Website
    @Rurik

    yes, but if you can preen at how much more noble and kosher you are compared to evil Germans or ‘racist’ Americans

    The point isn’t that Germans or Americans are racist, the point is that top Jews are Zionist psychopaths who mentality is a communicable disease that is wrecking the world, and useful idiots of all varieties — left to right, religious to secular — are helping them do it for Money and Power, because they’ve been taught that the Jewish way is the only way.

    The Jewish game is endless divide and rule, which sows endless war and chaos, except in well-insulated Zion (wherever the imperious and insular kikes and kike-juniors set up their fiefdoms). But the thing is, their fiefdoms inevitably shrink smaller and smaller as the kike retreats further and further into ignobility, sociopathy, and hypocritical self-righteousness, and inevitably throws ever more “goyim” under the bus.

    The only way to put an end to the kike (under all its guises) is to put an end to the 6000 Year Old Earth fantasy, where the kike retreats to preserve its megalomania and its entitled sense of “choseness.” It’s the kike tyrant’s security blanket and mama’s tit.

    Some Jew experimented with lobotomies in an attempt to remove “anti-Semitism” from the human race, but what he was really trying to do was remove the kike mentality from the human race, he just didn’t know it. It was a classic case of Jewish projection, and then final solution.

    The real “final solution” is end to the tyrannical and “elite”-imposed kike paradigm.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  124. @Triteleia Laxa

    This is stupid.”

    If that makes you feel ‘smart,’ so be it.

    I’m of the opinion brains are way more complex than a single, snarly remark.

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  125. @Daniel Rich

    Good for you, but I went into detail on why it was stupid in my reply to Ron Unz. He has not make a point against it and I don’t believe anyone would be able to.

    The more evil and powerful you make your big bad, the harder you will find it to explain why they haven’t won everything.

    You will also look particularly foolish when that big bad cannot seem to overcome overcome the most minor of geopolitical obstacles.

    • Replies: @Anne Lid
  126. S says:
    @Jiminy

    After JFK jr died there was a toxic eulogy of sorts written in one of the newspapers there in the US, and it was pretty savage.

    That was ‘A Conversation in Hell’ by John Podhoretz which appeared in the July 21st, 1999 edition of the NY Post, less than a week after JFK Jr’s untimely death.

    Frankly, I’m surprised the Post published the piece.

    ‘So every time you [Joseph Kennedy Sr] think the deal is done, every time you think your family is on its way back to glory, I [Lucifer] just have to do something. Like I did this weekend, with your grandson John.’

    .

    https://nypost.com/1999/07/21/a-conversation-in-hell/

    • Thanks: Z-man, HbutnotG
    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  127. Anne Lid says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    They are taking the lands you mentioned (and fulfill their other aims) little by little, so self confident, insouciant, trite and lax people will not notice that they are mere frogs in a slow cooker.

    • Thanks: Arthur MacBride
  128. @Triteleia Laxa

    Have you ever heard about people driving while on Ambien?

  129. @A little boy in the crowd

    I think it was pretty well established early on that the PFLP penetrated a US DEA operation in Lebanon, placed a bomb in a radio with a patsy carrying drugs to the USA, in a DEA sting operation, and did so on behalf of the Iranians as revenge for the deliberate shooting down of an Iranian airbus over the Persian Gulf by the USS Vincennes. The later blaming of Libya was yet another Imperial Lie, one of very, very, many.

  130. @S

    Down to the third generation-these Talmudists really mean what their diabolical tracts assert.

  131. JamesinNM says:

    At the final judgement the truth will be shouted from the rooftops, and all evil will suffer the second death snd burn for eternity. Life is a mere breath, but eternity is infinite.

  132. @Triteleia Laxa

    Britain was a world power transferring populations at will, yet the British promise Palestine to the Jews, and then the Jews force that powerful Empire to leave as Sokolow’s fake vision is replaced by the concept of state based on Jewish Chauvinism?

    So let me get this straight. It’s not enough for a few million Jews to purge the current territory of Israel, it’s not until they’re in control of greater Israel, when Syria and the Sinai and Jordan are ready to be settled and the new Temple is being built, that we’re going to be forced to bow down to them (as opposed to just the politicians). Right?

    Because Zionist Jews can’t deliberately attack a US Naval vessel and get the US to beg for more such stabs in the back?

    Plausible deniability or overarching Jew power is thinner by the day, SUPREME COURT OF MANKIND IN JERUSALEM, David Ben-Gurion, LOOK magazine Jan 16, 1962.

    We know what the Jews want to do, what they’re willing to try. Sure they are toying with us. Greater Israel at this particular moment would no be in their interests. Their power has always been based on deception, even now, as they have grown so brazen and bold, they are still first and foremost LIARS.

    • Agree: Arthur MacBride
  133. I’d be happy to watch the docuseries “Sacrificing Liberty,” but I sure as heck am not going to pay $13. Sorry.

  134. @Iris

    Can you explain why you think so?

  135. Rurik says:
    @Chris Moore

    The only way to put an end to the kike (under all its guises) is to put an end to the 6000 Year Old Earth fantasy

    Wally is always on about the exposing the holocaust narrative as the only way to end it..

    But I don’t think we have to repudiate Christianity or the Bible to free mankind from the fiends who’re laying waste to the West. The West has been under the thrall of Christianity for over fifteen centuries. In that time they’ve repulsed relentless Muslim incursions, civilized vast continents of their savagery and cruelty, ended cannibalism and slavery for the most part, created spectacular miracles in science and technology, and invented human freedom along the way.

    All of it by Christians.

    I’m not a believer in the Biblical account of earth’s advent, or humans for that matter, but what’s important about the people of the West, isn’t so much their current religious beliefs, but rather the virtue of their blood.

    If Icelanders want to pray in churches, or dance to their ancient Pagan Gods, then I doubt it will effect all that much in the way of Icelandic society, so long as they don’t import ‘diversity’ to destroy their blood for all eternity, and send their progeny reeling into the abyss of ethnic hatred and diversity horrors.

    As for a general awakening from the suicidal slumber the people of the West are spiritually dying from, I advocate finding out about the truth of 9/11.

    If you want to know who and why our nations and governments are betraying us for, and why, simply find out what really happened on that day, and nothing could be more shocking to the sensibilities of the willfully catatonic.

    From the USS Liberty, to wrapping your brain around 9/11

    that is how you jolt the sheople out of the self-imposed intellectual coma.

    People can still be Christians, and wrestle with the realities that are America’s special little relationship with the Zionist regime.

    I figure it’s extremely likely that Israel assassinated JFK (and RFK to prevent an investigation). Not just because of the persuasive arguments put out by men like Michael Collins Piper, and Ron Unz, but because by now it seems obvious that this is their nature. To murder when it somehow suits them to do so. And to do it so big, that few people can comprehend the enormity of their depraved tribal squalor.

    But the presidential assassinations were a very long time ago, just as the holocaust was a long time ago. But 9/11 should be relatively fresh in most people’s minds. It happened in our lifetimes, and has been used as a pretext for the Eternal Wars for Israel, just as it’s been used as a pretext to assassinate American citizens without due process, subvert our Constitutional rights, and to ‘justify’ America operating a torture facility for foreign nationals who object to the ZUS illegally occupying their countries, (on behalf of Israel).

    If Americans could be cajoled to see the truth about 9/11. then that would be the enlightenment that would make any fallacies about how old the earth really is, or what happened during the so-called holocaust, or even who killed JFK, as moot.

    Because it is the exact same actors who perpetrated all these crimes, and more.

    Zion.

    Israel.

    Jewish supremacist Inc.

    It caused the death of hundreds of millions of Christians in the last century, and it fully intends to stick a knife in the back of Western civilization and its people, in this century.

    It’s time we started to pull that knife out of our collective backs, and give it back to rightful owners.

    • Agree: Arthur MacBride
  136. Ron Unz says:
    @Alden

    Read any biography of Sirhan or my post # 28 that summarizes why Siirhan and his family had reason to hate American politicians loyal to Israel…He, his brothers and parents were very very bitter about the Israeli storm troopers who seized the family home and turned them out in 1948.

    That may or may not be correct, but it’s also irrelevant. The main reason I’m pretty sure that Sirhan didn’t kill RFK is that according to the official coroner’s report, the fatal shot was fired at absolutely point-blank range from behind, while all the witnesses agree that Sirhan was standing several feet in front of him.

    Presumably, if the conspirators were seeking a patsy for the assassination, they would have wanted someone with a half-credible reason for killing RFK, and Sirhan’s family experience in Palestine fit that bill perfectly.

    • Agree: acementhead
    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
    , @Alden
  137. @Gaspar DeLaFunk

    And that’s saying something.

  138. @bayviking

    I believe Kennedy was victim #7.

    Money quote from Richard Nixon: “Lyndon and I came from similar backgrounds and had a similar relationship to power. We both knew how to get it and how to use it. The main difference is that I wasn’t willing to kill for it”. After his resignation, someone asked Nixon why he didn’t expose the plot to unseat him. “I didn’t want to go out like Jack,” he replied.

    You can find the details Johnson’s victims in Roger Stone’s book, The Man Who Killed Kennedy. I suggest watching this interview first: https://www.c-span.org/video/?316819-1/the-man-killed-kennedy.

  139. anon[825] • Disclaimer says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    My assertion was that hypnotism of that sort is a fantasy. It could never come close to serving the function that was alleged.

    What other methods plus drugs used on Sirhan?

  140. Getaclue says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    I think this book lays out the Mafia side of it pretty well, I believe Sam G’s brother was very honest and took personal risk to put this book out… — and the fact Sam G was working with the CIA for years as to Cuba etc. is indisputable now — other “players” were definitely involved and there is zero doubt President Johnson (who would have been indicted and had a paid murderer in his employ) was the needed “point man” for all of it to work. Sam G ended up with a bullet to the back of his head of course — same as Kennedy but Kennedy got Last Rights so we don’t know where he ended up — Sam G?:

  141. @Jiminy

    The younger John Kennedy was one of the founders of George Magazine. In March 1997 he ran an article about the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin:

    http://www.web.archive.org/web/20130601040522/http://www.jfkmontreal.com/jfk_jr_%26_rabin.htm

    Whatever you make of the article itself, it clearly pissed off some important people by raising the issue of Rabin’s assassination in a JFK sort of way. That coupled with the fact that these charges were being promoted by a descendant of the original JFK, who had also expressed an interest in investigating the Dallas assassination, would have been enough of a motive for bumping off the junior Kennedy.

  142. @Ron Unz

    Sirhan Sirhan is still alive, because he had his death penalty commuted. What group invents the technology to hypnotise assassins, then doesn’t even use him as the assassin, and leaves him alive for decades afterwards?

    If I could create assassins through hypnosis, I would be able to do anything I want.

    You will also find, if you ask a coroner, that their reports are not based on an exact science. Witnesses saw RFK turn in such a way that Sirhan could have placed the shot, and many professionals have attested that a bullet wound, looking like it was from a round fired close up, could also be from a round fired a few feet away.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    , @BlackFlag
    , @Alden
  143. anarchyst says:
    @Mario Partisan

    I read the entire “Warren Report on Assassinations” at a tender young age, and even then thought to myself “what a crock of sh!t”. I saw through the deceptions, lies and coverups that the “Warren Report” tried to present as TRUTH…

    • Replies: @Ivan
  144. BlackFlag says:
    @The Alarmist

    Out of all the assassinations in history, has there ever been a case, such as in the JFK one, where the assassin was taken into custody and then immediately assassinated himself? I don’t know of any, but the odds must be extremely. Imagine if the same thing happened again to the assassin of JFK’s brother. If both Kennedy’s were assassinated by the same entity/people, it would be unwise to make it too similar. I would think something like poisoning of RFK would be smarter. As it were, the two killings are extremely suspicious, but they worked and we have to tip our hats to whoever pulled it off if they were in fact not the official assassins.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  145. @Alden

    That was one helluva dressin’ down, Alden. 🙂

    Didn’t know France imported African slaves to Missouri.

  146. Ron Unz says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    Sirhan Sirhan is still alive, because he had his death penalty commuted. What group invents the technology to hypnotise assassins, then doesn’t even use him as the assassin, and leaves him alive for decades afterwards?

    He always claimed he had no memory of the events. Given that Oswald’s killing has always been regarded as so extremely suspicious, if a second Kennedy assassin were also immediately killed, the consequences might have been too serious.

    You will also find, if you ask a coroner, that their reports are not based on an exact science.

    I’m not a coroner and have zero expertise. But the official verdict of the very experienced LA coroner was that RFK was shot from behind, at a distance of an inch or two. I think there were even powder-burns. Meanwhile, Sirhan was standing several feet in front.

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  147. Beagle says:

    One of the other interesting Ostrovsky revelations is Operation Trojan. According to him, Israel used a device (trojan) to fake communications from Libya and tricked Reagan into launching airstrikes.

    If true, it seems to be a reoccurring play in the playbook.

  148. @Ron Unz

    He always claimed he had no memory of the events. Given that Oswald’s killing has always been regarded as so extremely suspicious, if a second Kennedy assassin were also immediately killed, the consequences might have been too serious

    They could have just not commuted his death sentence. It would be safer, in case he ever remembered.

    I’m not a coroner and have zero expertise.

    An opinion in a coroner’s report is not a fact. Coroners frequently disagree, even now. The report is interesting, but doesn’t disprove that Sirhan Sirhan did the shooting. The mainstream account was reviewed and found the most probable afterwards.

    • Troll: Arthur MacBride
  149. Franz says:
    @Alden

    Senator McCarthy has the right idea.

    A lot of people had the idea.

    Eugene MacCarthy was in the middle of a campaign and said it in front of witnesses. True, honesty is best, but politics has rules.

    The interesting part of the Election Years 1964 – 1968 is that blunt trauma honesty knocked two candidates into oblivion.

    Gene on RFK was the one in 68. In 1964 Barry Goldwater got totally fed up with our Eastern liberal press and told an audience “I’d like to saw off the Eastern Seaboard and let it float out to sea.”

    These days, it’s fun to know that people still think the same as then. But they rarely say it.

  150. Franz says:
    @S

    I once read of a security expert who had been around during the 60’s who believed RFK’s assassination was almost inevitable

    Yep.

    Jack and Bobby were both fatalists, and clearly misunderstood the intentions of their opponents.

    But till the Reagan years, security for presidents was a joke. They had a bodyguard, maybe two, and usually untrained and absent. “Secret Service” was reserved for old dudes nearing retirement.

    Harry Truman liked to take long, fast walks after dinner in the evening. Tourists would say “Hi” as he flew past them. Reporters used to joke about how far behind Harry his security agents were because he was in better shape.

    Very different country then.

    • Replies: @S
  151. BlackFlag says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    What group invents the technology to hypnotise assassins, then doesn’t even use him as the assassin, and leaves him alive for decades afterwards?

    If I could create assassins through hypnosis, I would be able to do anything I want.

    They were unable to create effective assassins. They were able to create an effective patsy, i.e. a confused, dazed idiot sloppily firing a gun off. One could imagine a program using hypnosis and drugs to create assassins sort of working but still not dependable. So they send out this guy but back him up with a pro(s). This fits with the Arafat story. Sounds kind of crazy but maybe not so much given the MK Ultra, burundanga crimes, and what seemingly level-headed people like Scott Adams say about hypnosis.

    There’s too much evidence and virtually no arguments against it except stuff like, “well the coroner might have made a mistake.”
    1) Distance of shooter (coroner, witnesses?).
    2) Wound entries from the back (coroner, witnesses).
    3) Numbers of bullets fired (holes in walls, audio).
    4) Several witnesses (some back up the other claims, others say they saw other people pull guns).
    5) Exit through the pantry.
    6) Failure to investigate obvious leads.

    Not that this is strong evidence, but Sirhan carrying a single newspaper clipping in his pocket that establishes motive seems fake. So on-the-nose that it makes me think it isn’t fake, LOL. But since nobody else seemed to find it weird, maybe it wasn’t too fake.

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
    , @Schuetze
  152. Pheasant says:
    @anonymous

    ‘A .22 caliber pistol wouldn’t be the first choice for an assassination since it’s at the low end of the caliber spectrum. Sure, it worked but going in a capable assassin would have picked a heavier caliber which means the shooter wasn’t very knowledgeable about guns. ‘

    This is completely and utterly false. .22 pistols are the reccomended tools for assasinations for several reasons:

    1. They are easier to control and get hits on target. Proper assasination technique is to get multiple hits on the head/brainstem. This avoids body armour and disables the target as it is dying. Failing this hitting the spinal cord is acceptable but not as effective.

    2 .22 calibre pistols are cheap and therefore more numerous: more guns to rule out in a murder investigation.

    3. .22 pistols leave behind less gunshot residue so it is more difficult for forensics to prove a suspect was the assasin.

    4. .22 calibre bullets are subsonic and so can disguise where a shooter is firing from giving the assasin more time to make accurate shots/ flee and get away.

    5. .22 guns are generally smaller and more concealable than other calibre guns e.g 9mm etc. Although that has changed now with concealed carry subcompact 9mm pistols.

    The Mossad used the beretta model 70 in .22 calibre for about 20 years and it was very successful. With modern hollow point/ flat nosed ammunition .22 rounds are deadlier than ever.

    • Agree: Z-man
    • Thanks: BlackFlag
  153. @Mulga Mumblebrain

    I had considered the U.S. destruction of IranAir Flight 655 (3 July 1988) as a motive for the destruction of Pan Am Flight 103 (21 Dec 1988).

    I do not believe that the two incidents were related. Arafat’s appearance at the UN was much more relevant. As I noted above, there are many details (specific information) that I could not cite above, because of space limitations, but they all point to Israel as the culprit.

    Nor do I think it plausible that Palestinians would act on behalf of Iran. Hezbollah yes, but Palestinians? I don’t think so.

    The USA claims that Libya did it. Israel claims that that Palestinians did it. I don’t believe either claim.

    You can believe Israeli lies if you wish.

    Thank you for commenting.

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  154. @RoatanBill

    ‘No one can be hypnotized without their cooperation.’

    There was the good looking girl. There was a good-looking girl at the AT&T store this afternoon — but I am strong.

  155. @Franz

    Interesting analysis and similar to others I have heard over the years about what some Senators and Congressmen really think but are afraid to really say it. Israel always has a variety of options to use in various forms “of noise” so that they can’t be pinned down. They are probably the originators of the “False Flag” game. They are the Masters of Deception and have honed their skills for over a thousand years manipulating everything from the media (which they own) to the governments to play the victim.

    No single group of people in the history of the world have done more damage to society than this small group of criminals.

    • Agree: Arthur MacBride
    • Replies: @Franz
  156. Federale says: • Website

    A very weak case. First it is claimed that Sirhan did not hate Kennedy, but then admit that the written threats to kill him were in the journal in Sirhan’s handwriting. Second, you quote the Coroner, but don’t further admit that the Coroner also said that the gun used by Sirhan was the murder weapon. Sirhan had a .22 caliber pistol, while the Security Guard would have had a .38 most likely, which at that time held six or few rounds. A head shot a point blank range with a .38 would have blow the whole head open from just the blast effect of the cartridge, much less the bullet. You claim Sirhan was hypnotized into killing Kennedy, which is not possible. Then you claim 12 rounds were fired, two from Sirhan. Well, the security guard would have fired at maximum six, so you have 4 unaccounted for rounds. Then you claim that Sirhan was reflexively pulling the trigger. Was he then firing rounds as well? There certainly is no evidence that the Jews had so much power they could have Kennedy killed by a Mexican security guard openly and cover that up. Just plain dumb.

    • Replies: @BlackFlag
  157. @BlackFlag

    Sounds kind of crazy

    There’s no reason to believe it.

    Not that this is strong evidence

    Agreed.

    There was an official review process. It concluded that Sirhan Sirhan assassinated RFK. I know no compelling reason to disbelieve it and there has been no further substantial evidence brought forward.

    Everything in this article, and on the comment threads is empty speculation, by people who have little idea what they are talking about, and extreme ideological motivation to push a certain line.

    Even without these red flags, I dislike arguing over what happened in historical events, as it is too easy to make any explanation fit.

    It reminds me of couples who rehash arguments from just a few months ago. They are able to create any narrative they want.

    I find these narratives get stranger and stranger, the further from the event that the re-argument takes place. The coincidence of how their individual narratives, fit their current emotional concerns, never seems to surprise them.

    • Agree: Alden
    • Replies: @BlackFlag
  158. christoso says:

    It is undeniable that the LAPD was involved in the coverup of RFK’s murder. Scott Enyart was a 15 year-old high school student photographing the Kennedy entourage in the Ambassador Hotel for his school newspaper. He was present in the pantry during the assassination where he recorded the moments before, during and after Sirhan fired his gun. When police or FBI noticed that he had photographed the entire event they forced him to turn over his camera and film, telling him it was needed for the murder investigation. Later he was told he would have to wait 20 years for the return of his film. When he finally arranged to have the film returned in 1988 it was supposedly stolen from the courier’s vehicle while on route to him. Unlike the Zapruder film of JFK’s murder, the public has never been allowed to see Scott Enyart’s photos.
    Here is Scott Enyart telling his story in an interview with Blackopradio: https://ourhiddenhistory.org/entry/scott-enyart-on-black-op-radio-the-rfk-assassination-and-the-lapd-cover-up

    • Thanks: BlackFlag
    • Replies: @BlackFlag
    , @Jiminy
  159. BlackFlag says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    There was an official review process. It concluded that Sirhan Sirhan assassinated RFK. I know no compelling reason to disbelieve it and there has been no further substantial evidence brought forward.

    That’s begging the question. The entire point of a “conspiracy theory” is to question the official review.

    I know no compelling reason to disbelieve it

    I knew almost nothing about this assassination, but after reading the article found plenty of evidence to disbelieve the official story. Then, scrolling down the thread, I found *no compelling* evidence to question the article! That’s almost unheard of on this website. For all the other ones (e.g. holocaust, 9/11, JFK, COVID, Icebreaker) there is a lot of good back-and-forth leaving me undecided.

    Figuring out who was behind it is a lot trickier, but there seems to be overwhelming evidence that Sirhan didn’t act alone and didn’t fire the fatal shot.

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  160. anonymous[139] • Disclaimer says:
    @Pheasant

    22 pistols are the reccomended tools for assasinations for several reasons:

    Proper assasination technique

    Yeah right, nice to hear from a professional assassin to weigh in on this. Recommended by who? How many hits have you carried out? Even James Bond used a bigger caliber.

  161. Chris Moore says: • Website
    @Alden

    Historically, it was always always Muslims and Jews united against Christians from 700 AD till about 1900 . When British politicians became pro Zionist for various reasons including bribery blackmail the Suez canal plans to seize Turkish territory in any future war and other motives.

    The “other motives” are NWO greed — the same reason the Anglo-Imperialists joined with the Jewish Bolsheviks to knock off Germany/Christendom. The same Anglo-Zionist coalition staged 9/11 as the pretext for the “War on Terror” to knock off Islam for Israel, oil, and mineral wealth The same Anglo-Zionist coalition is flooding the West with Muslim refugees from their wars for profit and Zion.

    You want to concentrate on the historical Christian vs. Muslim wars? How about the wars the Zionists are waging against Christianity, the West AND Islam to fatten their kike bank accounts?

    Quite shilling for the kikes, liberal Jew-lover.

  162. anaccount says:

    It’s funny how so many people are vexxed by these camelot killings. All one needs to do is spend about an hour on Unz to find out the truth. I will be sharing this article with my boomer father since he probably didn’t read the last one I sent to him.

  163. @EuroNat

    Scopolamine makes your pupils dilate, telltale sign.

  164. I am not a fan of the Israelis, but the primary problem with your hypothesis is that the Israelis could not have controlled the JFK autopsy the way the deep state intelligence/military types did!

    FYI –

    The JFK Medical Coverup

  165. BlackFlag says:
    @Federale

    First it is claimed that Sirhan did not hate Kennedy, but then admit that the written threats to kill him were in the journal in Sirhan’s handwriting.

    The claim is that they got him to write the stuff under hypnosis/drugs. But this is weak evidence anyway. If I were choosing a patsy, I would find someone who hated RFK.

    Second, you quote the Coroner, but don’t further admit that the Coroner also said that the gun used by Sirhan was the murder weapon

    This is interesting. Would it be coroner or ballistic’s responsibility to determine that? I wonder how he came up with that determination given this:

    the serial number of Sirhan’s pistol did not match the serial number of the pistol by which were test fired the bullets compared with those extracted from Robert’s brain

    Can you provide a link to what the coroner said regarding the weapon?

    Sirhan had a .22 caliber pistol, while the Security Guard would have had a .38 most likely

    Then you claim 12 rounds were fired, two from Sirhan. Well, the security guard would have fired at maximum six, so you have 4 unaccounted for rounds

    These are weak. The guard could have prepared with any weapon he wanted. Nobody would have checked what he was carrying. Furthermore, there could have been multiple guards involved (enough bullets) and the shooter(s) may not even have been guards. One guard/killer might have carried more than one weapon.

    You claim Sirhan was hypnotized into killing Kennedy, which is not possible.

    Hypnotized/drugged into sloppily brandishing a gun and firing off haphazardly. Yeah, this is a big claim. Maybe I should get into hypnosis.

  166. BlackFlag says:
    @christoso

    Later he was told he would have to wait 20 years for the return of his film. When he finally arranged to have the film returned in 1988 it was supposedly stolen from the courier’s vehicle while on route to him. Unlike the Zapruder film of JFK’s murder, the public has never been allowed to see Scott Enyart’s photos.

    Just listened, slight correction.
    When Enyart claimed the film in 1988, they first said it had been destroyed, burned. Then in 1996 he filed a suit against the LAPD for damages from the loss of the film. The LAPD now suddenly found it. They sent it to the court but the judge said that it had been tampered with cause it was open or something; he sent it back for them to repackage it. After supposedly doing that, the LAPD sent it again by courier to the court and then it was stolen, LOL. All this stuff is in the record cause of the lawsuit.
    Seems like one of the most open and shut conspiracy cases insofar that it’s clear there is something off about the official story.

  167. gatobart says:

    The real mystery to me is, if this guy was really the patsy in the Robert Kennedy assassination, why, why, why after 53 years past the event hasn’t he been Epstein-ed or Ruby-ed, if you get my drift. Why just keep him lingering in a forgotten cell like an old single shoe in a closet.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  168. HbutnotG says:
    @RoatanBill

    Nobody can be hypnotized without their cooperation. Obviously true.

    Actually, less than half of people are able to get hypnotized, even if they try to get hypnotized.

    Hypnotism is a television script item, little more.

  169. nsa says:
    @Joe Levantine

    With a little massaging by the jew controlled media, by 2003 some 70% of the Amelikan public believed Sadam was in part responsible for 911. Give humble nsa control of the vile media for a couple of months and he could have most of public happily munching on sugar coated dog turds……yummy and nutritious and organic.

  170. S says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    My assertion was that hypnotism of that sort is a fantasy. It could never come close to serving the function that was alleged. Your reply, ironically, provides evidence for me. It would never work.

    I’d tend to agree with you.

    However, while targeted individuals being ‘hypnotized’/’brainwashed’ (as in the Manchurian Candidate) that upon being ‘triggered’ will robot-like assassinate a particular presidential candidate does seem a bit fanciful, the idea that entire sections of large populations can be conditioned by the corporate mass media to respond in certain broad ways doesn’t.

    For instance, it sure seemed a lot of folks had been succesfully conditioned by the corporate media that at the simple sight of a red Maga hat (ie a ‘trigger’) they would react violently to it. And, if I didn’t know better by the reporting, ie direct allusions to assassination, it was almost as if the mass media was hoping somebody would ‘JFK’ Trump.

    Same goes for Barack Obama and how the media was continuously comparing him to both Kennedy and Lincoln, bearing in mind what happened to the two.

    Are they hoping in such instances that an unstable person, an Oswald type, will unconsciously latch on to such messages and act upon them?

    In 1961 Dr Robert J Lifton wrote about these enmasse ‘brainwashing’ techniques called Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism. The ‘eight criteria for thought reform’ Lifton describes were the psychological control techniques that were used by Red China upon their people, to manipulate them, which they had in turn learned from the Soviet Union. They are the same techniques the US corporate media uses today upon the American public.

    Anyhow, as an aside, the pic below was made in September, 1956 during Oswald’s last few weeks as a tenth grader in a Fort Worth, TX high school, and appeared in the school’s 1957 yearbook. Oswald, shortly after (in October ’56) will join the US Marine Corps, and the rest is history.

    ‘Bing’ in the context it is used here means “to move speedily with noise”.

    Things like this yearbook entry almost make one wonder if Carl Jung was on to something with his ideas on ‘synchronicity’ and the ‘collective unconscious’

    If it was merely a ‘cosmic joke’ of sorts, and I say this only half in jest, it was in very poor taste.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_Reform_and_the_Psychology_of_Totalism

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
    , @Wielgus
  171. As a retired civil litigation attorney, evidence was what I made my living on.

    Successful litigators know to avoid weak arguments and to push their strongest. Common sense, right?

    Yet for over 54 years running the MSM has consistently avoided seriously considering the one absolute smoking gun (literally!) that exists in Sirhan’s favor, and which comes from a world-renowned top expert in their respective field: the conclusion by LA County Coroner, Dr. Noguchi that there were powder burns consistent with a firearm discharge within a few inches of Kennedy’s neck/head where the fatal wound occurred.

    The conclusion to be drawn from this willful myopia is obvious and troubling…..

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  172. @BlackFlag

    That’s begging the question. The entire point of a “conspiracy theory” is to question the official review.

    No, it is epistemological humility. You can’t treat mass events from the past like a jigsaw puzzle. You do not have the pieces in front of you to test. People, who have a hard time putting themselves into the shoes of others, are prone to this sort of epistemological hubris.

    Figuring out who was behind it is a lot trickier, but there seems to be overwhelming evidence that Sirhan didn’t act alone and didn’t fire the fatal shot

    I don’t find some circumstantial evidence, based on confused people at a confusing event, “overwhelming”. You claim you do. Do you get overwhelmed by loud noises too?

    • Replies: @BlackFlag
  173. @Alden

    ‘You know absolutely nothing about what Algerian Muslims did to Europe for a thousand years before France ended it.’

    My impression is that it was a two-way street.

  174. @HbutnotG

    ‘Nobody can be hypnotized without their cooperation. Obviously true.

    ‘Actually, less than half of people are able to get hypnotized, even if they try to get hypnotized…’

    Meh. At least according to Ronen Bergman, the Israelis really were playing around with it at the time. It’s hardly proof, but they could have gotten Sirhan to act as he did.

    I’m intrigued by the amnesia angle. Sirhan seems to be sincere about that — and yet no one has mentioned similar episodes at other times in his life that I’m aware of.

  175. @BlackFlag

    ‘…Out of all the assassinations in history, has there ever been a case, such as in the JFK one, where the assassin was taken into custody and then immediately assassinated himself?’

    There’s the remarkably hurried execution of Admiral Darlan’s killer. Of course, that assassination was also very suspicious. Huey Long’s assassin was immediately shot down — but that one too was a bit odd.

    • Thanks: BlackFlag
    • Replies: @BlackFlag
    , @Wielgus
  176. @Rurik

    I agree with you, Rurik. You misunderstood or overinterpreted my comment. I was originally responding to Alden’s silly comment anyway (which was a bad idea). Never mind.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  177. @RationalandLogical

    Agree. LBJ is a big part of the equation, for both JFK and RFK (he was in power at the time of both investigations). The JFK autopsy was done in the Bethesda Naval Hospital, and LBJ had some control over the Navy. Without Johnson, Israel couldn’t have done it. The question, then, is: how far would Johnson go for Israel. The answer is in the USS Liberty story. Johnson was, pretty much, a sayan.

    • Replies: @Pâquerette
  178. @gatobart

    ‘The real mystery to me is, if this guy was really the patsy in the Robert Kennedy assassination, why, why, why after 53 years past the event hasn’t he been Epstein-ed or Ruby-ed, if you get my drift. Why just keep him lingering in a forgotten cell like an old single shoe in a closet.’

    Alive, what’s he going to say? After all, he appears to genuinely have no recollection of the events.

    He’s harmless. But murdered, he’s a red flag.

    Hell, if I was part of the league of darkness, and I really could control events, I’d parole him. It’d gin up hostility towards Palestinians and generate support for Israel.

  179. Jiminy says:
    @christoso

    Where everything fell apart for Enyart was he didn’t have either berg or stein at the end of his surname. If he had then he would have received millions for his film and probably a grovelling apology to go with the windfall. But hey, that’s life.

  180. Beagle says:

    A brief history of the western .22 caliber spy gun of choice.

    https://taskandpurpose.com/gear-tech/history-cias-silent-pistol-choice/

    I don’t think they’d use it for decades if it couldn’t take down human targets. They weren’t hunting rabbits.

  181. Franz says:
    @niteranger

    No single group of people in the history of the world have done more damage to society than this small group of criminals.

    No small group of criminals ever had so many accomplices… or maybe they’re not quite as small a group as we’re given to believe. Either way, vexing.

  182. @RationalandLogical

    James Jesus Angleton was the point man for the Mossad within the CIA at that time.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1987/12/05/the-secret-ceremony/d8d30dab-fe95-4ba0-b52f-c50a04795b77/

    “Although his name appears in few history books about Israel, Angleton played a crucial role in the early years of the young Jewish state… he helped forge links between the Mossad and the CIA…”

    All of the evidence about a CIA link to the JFK assassination ultimately runs through Angleton. Because the Israel-lobby grew in vast scope after 1967 it’s easy to look back on a year like 1963 and get the sense that it wasn’t so strong then, and that is partly true. But the link with Angleton accounts for the missing piece here.

  183. Schuetze says:
    @BlackFlag

    “They were unable to create effective assassins.”

    Both John Hinckley and Mark David Chapman had “Catcher in the Rye” in their possession after their attempted/successful assassinations of Reagan/Lennon. This was a strong indication that they had undergone MKUltra Monarch style mind control with Catcher in the Rye somehow being the trigger. I guess you could make the claim based on Hinkley that they were not “effect assassins”, but it would appear that they were unleashed with the intent to carry out their programming.

    The Hinckley family has intimate, high level contacts with the Bush family, which might make one wonder why they would sacrifice one of their children. One must view this reason to doubt this theory of Hinkley in light of the illumanti’s tendency to use the sacrifice of a first born child as part of the initiation ritual and proof of commitment to the society.

    David McGowan goes into this in his book Programmed to Kill.

  184. Schuetze says:
    @Pheasant

    The Mossad assassin who carried out the revenge murder for the “Munich Massacre” famously used a .22 Walther PPK to kill many of the PLO victims.

    • Thanks: BlackFlag
  185. Is there anyone on this thread who feels that the Israelis have tried to mind control them?

    • Replies: @Jiminy
  186. @Franklin Ryckaert

    “Much of the success of the Jews in the US is possible because of the ignorance and gullability of the public.”

    It’s the universal truth.

  187. Sirius says:
    @A little boy in the crowd

    Not that I’m challenging you, but I would like to hear more details. The whole official story never made any sense.

    Incidentally, technically Ronald Reagan was still president in December 1988, though Bush I may have been in charge by then and he was president-elect.

    Tangentially, Patrick Seale wrote an entire book on a Palestinian who specialized in false flag operations for the Zionists entitled “Abu Nidal: Gun for Hire”. The “Israelis” began an entire war based on one of those false flag operations in London in 1982, invading Lebanon to exterminate the PLO and the Palestinian presence in Lebanon. It is a valuable source on Israeli false flag operations and quite indicative of what they are capable of.

  188. BlackFlag says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    Skeptic: I don’t believe the official version because of x, y, z.
    Triteleia Laxa: I believe it because there was an official review.

    This is a textbook case of begging the question.
    Twice you’ve misrepresented the hypnosis/drugged theory.
    You haven’t even disputed the evidence presented, so I’m not sure what you are doing in this thread.

  189. Jiminy says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    Judging by how Israel constantly gets a free pass on the atrocities that it performs throughout the Middle East and in America, I would hazard a guess that the greater population of the US acts as if they are under a form of jewish mind control. How else can you explain it?

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  190. @Jiminy

    If you think that Israel “gets a pass”, you should learn about other countries. There are countless conflicts in the world where more people have died in the last year than have in the last 50 of the Israel-Palestine conflict.

    The winning or, if you prefer, “oppressing” party, in those conflicts, rarely comes under as much international condemnation as Israel does.

    Those conflicts then end, because the winner is allowed to win, while Israel-Palestine gets stuck in place, under the fixing gaze of the US-led international media.

    Colombia, Venzuela, Saudi Arabia in Yemen, Turkey, Morocco in the Western Sahara, Pakistan all over the place, India in Kashmir, China in Tibet and Xinjiang, Ethiopia and Eritrea in Tigray…I would be better off listing the countries that are more peaceful than Israel-Palestine.

    • Replies: @geokat62
    , @Jiminy
    , @geokat62
  191. BlackFlag says:
    @Colin Wright

    Darlan’s killer, Bonnier de La Chapelle, was executed by the authorities, not assassinated.
    Long’s shooter, Weiss, was shot by Long’s bodyguards which is to be expected. I’m sure this scenario has happened many times.
    The assassination of Lee Harvey Oswald appears to be singularly bizarre.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  192. @BlackFlag

    No, the evidence presented here was reviewed and found wanting by panels of experts who were closer to the event in time. They are more credible than those evaluating the same evidence on Unz, in every way.

    There’s nothing new or with substance in these comments. There’s just commenters noticing that people involved in the event gave conflicting and confusing accounts, like happens with all events

    My argument emphasised this and then asked those engaged to zoom out. Would the world be anything like it is now, many decades later, if our Unz “detectives through time”, were correct in their allegations?

    I see that it would obviously be completely different.

    Why do you think that some people, when looking at a sensationalised court case, defer their own opinion to the court process? Are they “begging the question”?

    • Troll: BlackFlag
  193. R2b says:

    Has there ever been an assassination of a politically important person, that was planned and executed by a solitary person(?).

  194. geokat62 says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    … under the fixing gaze of the US-led international media.

    US-led? LOL!

  195. gatobart says:

    Inejirō Asanuma was a Socialst politician in the 1950s, the head of the Japanese Socialist Party. As the story goes, after WW2 the “American” empire had decided to hide its blatant taking over of newly acquired possessions, specially in Western Europe and Japan, by establishing, or allowing, fake open and democratic electoral systems to function within which every political tendency could be expressed and every political ideology could present its own candidates to power. That of course as part of its propaganda war against the Soviet Union during its Cold War. “America” had to do it, as it couldn’t possibly portray the Soviet system as an authoritarian and repressive one if they were doing the same. That is the reason of all those fake democracies in countries military occupied by the US since WW2. Some leaders resisted for some time, most notably General De Gaulle who managed to hang on until the late sixties, but they were the exception. Most politicians in Western Europe and Japan knew the rules of the new game they have been invited to play and either chose to participate, giving legitimacy to the farce, or just went home. The most notorious examples of collaboration with these post-Nazi foreign invaders were the Communist and Socialist parties in Europe, specially those of France and Italy, they were accomplices for decades in the imposture of pretending to have democracies in their countries. But there were also other politicians, the minority, who were naive and gullible enough to actually believe that this “open and democratic system” imposed by the “American” invader was for real and in some cases they paid dearly for it. Asanuma was the most tragic and saddest case.

    In the late 50s poor Asanuma started to openly express his opposition to the state of Japan-US relations, apparently unaware that Japan had lost ww2 and so all political sovereignty. Even worse, he preached a foreign policy of close rapprochement to China and in 1959 he did the unthinkable at that time and in those circumstances. He visited Communist China and in a speech in Beijing he declared the U.S. “the common enemy of Japan and China”. Then:

    “On 12 October 1960, Asanuma was assassinated by 17-year-old Otoya Yamaguchi, a nationalist, during a televised political debate for the coming elections for the House of Representatives”

    “Yamaguchi was captured at the scene of the crime, and a few weeks afterwards committed suicide by hanging while in police custody”

    Needles to say, no other Socialist politician has ever appeared again in Japan, not anyone keeping such a high profile and having so frank views about the captive state of his nation anyway. The weirdest thing is that he was “assassinated by a Nationalist”, i.e. a young man who should have been on his same side, fighting to make Japan a truly independent country.

    My point bringing up this story is that there is the very likely possibility that Yamaguchi was just another Manchurian candidate, just like Oswald and Bishara Sirhan. In all three cases a high profile politician who is shaking the elites’ boat is assassinated and a patsy is readily presented as scapegoat for the public to see Justice served. But in final analysts they are all three the same thing: victims. I mean, it doesn’t matter if Yamaguchi actually murdered Asanuma in front of the world and neither LOH nor Sirhan did the same. Had Sirhan actually killed RK in front of the cameras the situation would be the same, he was used, he was under control, just a lab rat for his Deep State handlers.

  196. @Sirius

    You are correct. Bush Sr. was Regan’s vice-president. Bush had won the election, but he did not actually take office until 31 days after the Lockerbie bombing. Also you make a good point about Abu Nidal, the Palestinian (or fake Palestinian) who committed terrorist acts for the Israelis.

    Despite that error, I still hold to my suspicion that Pan Am Flight 103 was destroyed by Mossad, not by Libya or Palestinians.

    I also suspect that Mossad did the German bombing two years before. On 5 April 1986, a bomb exploded in the La Belle Discothèque in West Berlin, killing two American soldiers and a Turkish woman, and wounding 229, including 79 Americans. The discothèque was chosen because it was popular with US soldiers.

    The motive? According to former Mossad case officer Victor Ostrovsky in his book The Other Side of Deception, two months before the Germany bombing, Mossad planted a communications device called “the Trojan” in the top floor of an apartment house in Tripoli, Libya. The device received messages broadcast by Mossad on one frequency, and automatically forwarded the messages on a different frequency used by the Libyan government.

    Mossad used the device to broadcast messages that made it seem the Libyan government was planning to attack some place in Europe that was frequented by American military personnel. The Mossad fakes did not fool Spanish and French intelligence agencies, but they fooled the US government, which was convinced that the messages originated with the Libyan government. (The USA was intensely vilifying Libya, and eagerly welcomed any excuse to bomb Libya.)

    Eleven days after the Berlin bombing, US President Reagan ordered an attack on Libya, first giving advance notice to Israel. On the night of 16 April 1986 under the code name El Dorado Canyon, the U.S. launched a series of air strikes against Tripoli and Benghazi. Warplanes took off from England and from US aircraft carriers in the Mediterranean, and dropped sixty tons of bombs on Libya, murdering more than 100 civilians, including Muammar al-Qaddafi’s young daughter.

    That same night, the US air strike provided cover for the Jewish assassination of Khalil Ibrahim al-Wazir (an aid to Arafat) in his household in Tunis at 2:00 am, shooting him multiple times in front of his wife and son. That operation was overseen by Ehud Barak, who at that time led the Israeli military’s Sayeret Matkal death squads. Ehud Barak was so bloodthirsty that he became the most highly decorated soldier in Israeli history, and eventually became Israeli Prime Minister.

    (Four years earlier, Mr. Wazir had helped to prepare Beirut’s defenses against the Israeli invasion of Lebanon. Now in 1986 Wazir had started to organize youth committees in the occupied territories of Palestine, which eventually became the backbone of the First Palestinian Intifada.)

    Moammar Gaddafi had always been sympathetic to the Palestinian cause, and he let members of the Palestinian resistance live in Libya during the 1980s. Jewish hit squads frequently infiltrated Libya and assassinated key Palestinians. The Lockerbie bombing was just another Mossad operation to keep Americans angry at Libya and Palestinians.

  197. Anonymous[530] • Disclaimer says:
    @Bombercommand

    It is not well known, and never discussed, that it was not JFK who was intended to be President, but his older brother Joe Junior.

    It most certainly IS well known and OFTEN discussed by anyone discussing the Kennedy family.

    @War for Blair Mountain:

    JFK and RFK forced at military assault rifle gunpoint integration on White Deep South Women.

    If by “JFK and RFK” you mean “Eisenhower” you are correct.

    @Alden

    I doubt the lying media printed the locations of the voting day parties of the other candidates.

    Kennedy won the primary. Parties are for winners.

    @Triteleia

    They could have just not commuted his death sentence. It would be safer, in case he ever remembered.

    It wasn’t a matter of choice. California abolished the death penalty entirely. Facts ‘n’ stuff.

    • Replies: @Alden
  198. Rurik says:
    @Laurent Guyénot

    You misunderstood or overinterpreted my comment.

    I suspected as much.

    As I’ve mentioned, I generally agree with and always enjoy your articles.

  199. Rurik says:

    FWIW, (I didn’t watch the whole thing)

  200. @R2b

    Most politically-motivated assassination and assassination attempts in the U.S. fit the category of the single lone nut. The John Wilkes Booth-led conspiracy to murder Lincoln (and others) is an exception not the rule in America.

    One of the reasons why Europeans have had such a difficult time accepting that Oswald alone killed JFK is because it is not the rule there. Most political assassinations and assassination attempts in Europe are the result of conspiracies and not the work of lone nuts. Why? I’m guessing it’s probably the result of more guns being available in the U.S. and a more open political system in which U.S. presidents are expected to frequently mix with the common folk.

    Here is a list of U.S. presidential assassinations/assassination attempts and the culprits behind them. I have listed only those attempts which led to a weapon or weapons being discharged in the presence of the president and not those attempts which were discovered in the planning stages or before the president was in imminent danger. I have also not listed those attempts which took place on foreign soil (of which there are several).

    [MORE]

    Andrew Jackson (1835) – lone nut.

    Abraham Lincoln (1864) – A sniper fires at Lincoln’s head with a single shot while he was out on horseback, knocking off his hat; no one was ever caught or charged.

    Abraham Lincoln (1865) – conspiracy.

    James Garfield (1881) – lone nut.

    William McKinley (1901) – lone nut.

    Former President TR, while running for president again (1912) – lone nut.

    President-elect FDR (1933) – lone nut.

    Harry Truman (1947) – conspiracy.

    Harry Truman (1950) – conspiracy.

    President-elect JFK (1960) – lone nut.

    JFK (1963) – lone nut.

    Gerald Ford (Sept. 5th, 1975) – lone nut.

    Gerald Ford (Sept. 22nd, 1975) – lone nut.

    Ronald Reagan (1981) – lone nut.

    Bill Clinton (Oct. 29th, 1994) – lone nut fires at the White House with Clinton inside.

    Barack Obama (2011) – ditto.

    So of the sixteen above attempts on U.S. presidents, both successful and unsuccessful, only three have been the result of conspiracies, one is unclear (sniper attack on Lincoln), and twelve have been the work of lone nuts.

    • Replies: @gatobart
  201. @Mustapha Mond

    Well could it have been accidental then? The security guard trying to shoot at Sirhan Sirhan from behind RFK accidentally shooting him in the head in the melee. Seems like there were pretty bad shooters all around with Sirhan Sirhan missing RFK at such close range. And the security guard missing Sirhan Sirhan.

    • Replies: @BlackFlag
    , @Alden
  202. gatobart says:
    @Pincher Martin

    “Most politically-motivated assassination and assassination attempts in the U.S. fit the category of the single lone nut…One of the reasons why Europeans have had such a difficult time accepting that Oswald alone killed JFK is because it is not the rule there”

    Wow, you are just the guy I was looking for. The proud and happy future owner of the hundred acres of prime quality land in the swamps of Florida I got for sale at a derisory price. Now, if you are ready and willing to dare and take the offer I would throw in, for a few grands more, the Brooklyn Bridge, which is still in good condition and working after all these years.

    Waiting for your phone call or e-mail. (Oh, BTW, I have also a few pounds of Moon rocks, personally collected by Neil Armstrong during his historic trip of July 1969 that I would include as a gift)

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  203. @BlackFlag

    I’m not sure what you are doing in this thread.

    Perhaps you are just being courteous
    Perhaps you really do not know …

    I’d guess 90+% on UR do know what she’s doing here …

    Miss Laxative is a sayan

    Her job is to spread disinformation, tie you/anybody up in meandering “discussions”, waste your time, spam up the thread etc
    Most of them do it for free to help poor little misunderstood Israel.

  204. @gatobart

    I’m not interested in buying your swampland, Gatobart. Not that I believe you have any acreage down there. You seem like the kind of guy who would try to sell what he doesn’t actually own.

    As opposed to hawking Florida real estate, do you have a problem with my list? If so, what? I bet I can back my claims up far better than you can.

    • Replies: @gatobart
    , @Anonymous
  205. Ivan says:
    @A Half Naked Fakir

    Agree. Palestinian Christians in the nature of things would have held some desirable properties that the Zionists coveted. I think Edward Said’s family were pretty rich.

  206. Jiminy says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    I beg to differ. You seem to be sadly mistaken in thinking that Israel receives international condemnation for anything anywhere that it does wrong. It does not. Rarely do you see news reports here in my country about anything that happens in Israel, let alone bad mouthing their actions.
    Up until this last round of attacks on the rightful citizens of Palestine, it has been as if the torment that the Israelis have been handing out has never been occurring at all.
    We probably knew more of what was happening in North Korea than Israel.
    If there is a news story then it is always spun to show Israel in a good light. It has to.
    For as we all know, if the truth is spoken about the Israeli attacks on the Palestinians, then the Jewish lobby groups come out of the woodwork to attack those speaking the truth. Viva la Palestine.

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  207. Wielgus says:
    @Colin Wright

    The execution of Bogrov, the assassin of Tsarist minister Pyotr Stolypin in 1911, was rushed. Bogrov was an anarchist but also an informer. Stolypin had enemies in the Tsarist bureaucracy and it is possible they set him up.

    • Thanks: Colin Wright
  208. @S

    For instance, it sure seemed a lot of folks had been succesfully conditioned by the corporate media that at the simple sight of a red Maga hat (ie a ‘trigger’) they would react violently to it.

    I am sympathetic to this viewpoint, but I do not accept the behaviourist thesis: that you can persuade people to react emotionally to innocuous objects through a Pavlovian experiment.

    You would have to identify common psychological conflicts among the population, preferably ones that most have little insight to.

    You would then see how this conflict feels, understand it and find some plausible stand in for one side of it.

    If you hammered on about it enough, you would get people to think that their psychological issues were really about your stand in. This would create a strong emotional link. It may also arrest the development of your subjects, trapping them in an unresolvabke psychological dilemma.

    I don’t know if this specific possibility is recognised by others; but I would be astonished if someone had the skills to consciously engage in it, while doing so out of ill will.

  209. @Jiminy

    As of 2013, Israel had been condemned in 45 resolutions by the United Nations Human Rights Council

    I believe this represents as many as the rest of the world combined, even while the number of deaths from Israel/Palestine are somewhat around 0.00% of the total.

    Why do ~0% of the deaths, get almost 50% of the total condemnations?

    • Troll: Colin Wright
    • Replies: @geokat62
    , @Colin Wright
  210. gatobart says:
    @Pincher Martin

    If you really believe that Lee Harvey Oswald killed Kennedy acting alone, then there are only two possibilities:

    a) You don’t know a thing about this case, as even a sheet fly would have understood that the case against Oswald had absolutely no merit after a first reading of the story.

    b) You are a gullible clueless, hopeless moron, the kind that swallows whole the Jupiter-size turd that the same people who by 2021 can’t send a mouse to the ISS, only a few hundred miles away, was able 52 years ago to send entire human crews to the Moon and back, away a thousand times that distance, as if they were sending them to an European cruise. The same kind of rube that believes that Putin is the Devil incarnated, the new Stalin and that Russia is a Communist country. The same kind of dork who believes that “America’ is a beacon for democracy, freedom and human rights in the world.

    Oh, also the kind of dunce who believes also that Sleepy Joe was legitimately elected president of the USA after having gathered the biggest number of votes in the History of your nation.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  211. Ivan says:
    @anarchyst

    Agree. I read that book too, and in retrospect it was just a snow job. It had tons of materials on ballistics, rifle bore, keratin and such like but precious little on motives, conspiracies and such. It is little like a coroner producing a thesis on water it’s properties, salinity measurements and wind physics, without having to account for foul play.

  212. BlackFlag says:

    Misrepresentations, refusal to engage with the strongest arguments, logical fallacies, sprinkled with bits of truth. All written in an oblique way. I don’t know what this person’s intentions are but have also come to conclude they are acting in bad faith.

  213. Dr. Warren says: • Website
    @Laurent Guyénot

    Ah, the old “collective guilt” card used against us. Let’s see, there were what, a total of 2.5 million in the colonies in the mid-1770’s, of those how many actually had slaves? It was already an institution under attack in the North. How many white immigrants came here from Europe after the Revolutionary War? The vast majority of them. Let’s take the Irish as a case study, there were some here at the earliest times, yet, the overwhelming majority came in response to The Great Hunger (not really a true famine as the British exported at least five times enough food to feed the country) just to get here to fight in a Civil War, which resulted in the ending of slavery in the Southern states. How would you assign collective guilt upon them? How about the millions of Italians, Germans, Slavs, and Nordic people who came here after the Civil War?

    The talk of “white privilege”, “systemic racism”, and the like are simply Marxist tools to create division, don’t buy into it.

  214. @gatobart

    I suggest you look up Lawrent Guyénot’s contribution at The Unz Review from last December called “Remember the Kennedys: A Message from a Frenchman with Irish Music” and look at the comment section. I dominated it.

    I’ve read all of Ron Unz’s recommended books on JFK and Israel (post #73). As I pointed out last autumn, they do not support the argument Ron uses them to support.

    I’ve probably read far more on Kennedy and his administration than anyone here. (See my post #302 for a partial bibliography.) I dare say I’m also better informed about the era than anyone here.

    So I’ve done the work. You clearly have not. Oswald alone killed Kennedy. While it’s impossible to definitively rule out that someone else might’ve help Oswald in his task, he did not require it. The sniper’s nest was at his place of work. The rifle was his. Kennedy’s route through Dallas was public knowledge. He escaped first by bus and then taxi. Oswald killed Kennedy.

    It’s not even a difficult case. The evidence is straightforward and damning.

  215. geokat62 says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    As of 2013, Israel had been condemned in 45 resolutions by the United Nations Human Rights Council

    Jeremy Hammond compiled a list (up to the year 2010) of UNSC resolutions directly critical of Israel for violations of UNSC resolutions, the U.N. Charter, the Geneva Conventions, international terrorism, or other violations of international law… and they totalled 79:

    [MORE]

    Res. 57 (Sep. 18, 1948) – Expresses deep shock at the assassination of the U.N. Mediator in Palestine, Count Folke Bernadotte, by Zionist terrorists.

    Res. 89 (Nov. 17, 1950) – Requests that attention be given to the expulsion of “thousands of Palestine Arabs” and calls upon concerned governments to take no further action “involving the transfer of persons across international frontiers or armistice lines”, and notes that Israel announced that it would withdraw to the armistice lines.

    Res. 93 (May 18, 1951) – Finds that Israeli airstrikes on Syria on April 5, 1951 constitutes “a violation of the cease-fire”, and decides that Arab civilians expelled from the demilitarized zone by Israel should be allowed to return.

    Res. 100 (Oct. 27, 1953) – Notes that Israel had said it would stop work it started in the demilitarized zone on September 2, 1953.

    Res. 101 (Nov. 24, 1953) – Finds Israel’s attack on Qibya, Jordan on October 14-15, 1953 to be a violation of the cease-fire and “Expresses the strongest censure of that action”.

    Res. 106 (Mar. 29, 1955) – Condemns Israel’s attack on Egyptian forces in the Gaza Strip on February 28, 1955.

    Res. 111 (Jan. 19, 1956) – Condemns Israel’s attack on Syria on December 11, 1955 as “a flagrant violation of the cease-fire” and armistice agreement.

    Res. 119 (Oct. 31, 1956) – Considers that “a grave situation has been created” by the attack against Egypt by the forces of Britain, France, and Israel.

    Res. 171 (Apr. 9, 1962) – Reaffirms resolution 111 and determines that Israel’s attack on Syria on March 16-17, 1962 “constitutes a flagrant violation of that resolution”.

    Res. 228 (Nov. 25, 1966) – “Deplores the loss of life and heavy damage to property resulting from the action” by Israel in the southern Hebron area on November 13, 1966, and “Censures Israel for this large-scale military action in violation of the United Nations Charter” and the armistice agreement between Israel and Jordan.

    Res. 237 (Jun. 14, 1967) – Emphasizes “the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war”, emphasizes that member states have a commitment to abide by the U.N. Charter, and calls for the “Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied” during the June 1967 war.

    Res. 242 (Nov. 22, 1967) – Emphasizes “the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war”, emphasizes that member states have a commitment to abide by the U.N. Charter, and calls on Israel to withdraw from territories it occupied during the June 1967 war.

    Res. 248 (Mar. 24, 1968) – Observes that the Israeli attack on Jordan “was of a large-scale and carefully planned nature”, “Deplores the loss of life and heavy damage to property”, “Condemns the military action launched by Israel in flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter and the cease-fire resolutions”, and “Calls upon Israel to desist from” further violations of resolution 237.

    Res. 250 (Apr. 27, 1968) – Considers “that the holding of a military parade in Jerusalem will aggravate tensions in the area and have an adverse effect on a peaceful settlement of the problems in the area” and “Calls upon Israel to refrain from holding the military parade in Jerusalem which is contemplated” for May 2, 1968.

    Res. 251 (May 2, 1968) – Recalls resolution 250 and “Deeply deplores the holding by Israel of the military parade in Jerusalem” on May 2, 1968 “in disregard of” resolution 250.

    Res. 252 (May 21, 1968) – “Deplores the failure of Israel to comply with” General Assembly resolutions 2253 and 2254, considers Israel’s annexation of Jerusalem “invalid”, and calls upon Israel “to rescind all such measures already taken and to desist forthwith from taking any further action which tends to change the status of Jerusalem”.

    Res. 256 (Aug. 16, 1968) – Recalls Israel’s “flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter” condemned in resolution 248, observes that further Israeli air attacks on Jordan “were of a large scale and carefully planned nature in violation of resolution 248”, “Deplores the loss of life and heavy damage to property”, and condemns Israel’s attacks.

    Res. 259 (Sep. 27, 1968) – Expresses concern for “the safety, welfare and security” of the Palestinians “under military occupation by Israel”, deplores “the delay in the implementation of resolution 237 (1967) because of the conditions still being set by Israel for receiving a Special Representative of the Secretary-General”, and requests Israel to receive the Special Representative and facilitate his work.

    Res. 262 (Dec. 31, 1968) – Observes “that the military action by the armed forces of Israel against the civil International Airport of Beirut was premeditated and of a large scale and carefully planned nature”, and condemns Israel for the attack.

    Res.265 (Apr. 1, 1969) – Expresses “deep concern that the recent attacks on Jordanian villages and other populated areas were of a pre-planned nature, in violation of resolutions” 248 and 256, “Deplores the loss of civilian life and damage to property”, and “Condemns the recent premeditated air attacks launched by Israel on Jordanian villages and populated areas in flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter and the cease-fire resolutions”.

    Res. 267 (Jul. 3, 1969) – Recalls resolution 252 and General Assembly resolutions 2253 and 2254, notes that “since the adoption of the above-mentioned resolutions Israel has taken further measures tending to change the status of the City of Jerusalem”, reaffirms “the established principle that acquisition of territory by military conquest is inadmissible”, “Deplores the failure of Israel to show any regard for the resolutions”, “Censures in the strongest terms all measures taken to change the status of the City of Jerusalem”, “Confirms that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel which purport to alter the status of Jerusalem, including expropriation of land and properties thereon, are invalid and cannot change that status”, and urgently calls on Israel to rescind the measures taken to annex Jerusalem.

    Res. 270 (Aug. 26, 1969) – “Condemns the premeditated air attack by Israel on villages in southern Lebanon in violation of its obligations under the Charter and Security Council resolutions”.

    Res. 271 (Sep. 15, 1969) – Expresses grief “at the extensive damage caused by arson to the Holy Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem” on August 21, 1969 “under the military occupation of Israel”, reaffirms “the established principle that acquisition of territory by military conquest is inadmissible”, “Determines that the execrable act of desecration and profanation of the Holy Al-Aqsa Mosque emphasizes the immediate necessity of Israel’s desisting from acting in violation” previous resolutions and rescinding measures to annex Jerusalem, calls on Israel “to observe the provisions of the Geneva Conventions and international law governing military occupation”, and condemns Israel’s failure to comply with previous resolutions.

    Res. 279 (May 12, 1970) – “Demands the immediate withdrawal of all Israeli armed forces from Lebanese territory.”

    Res. 280 (May 19, 1970) – Expresses conviction that “that the Israeli military attack against Lebanon was premeditated and of a large scale and carefully planned in nature”, recalls resolution 279 “demanding the immediate withdrawal of all Israeli armed forces from Lebanese territory”, deplores Israel’s violation of resolutions 262 and 270, “Condemns Israel for its premeditated military action in violation of its obligations under the Charter of the United Nations”, and “Deplores the loss of life and damage to property inflicted as a result” of Israeli violations of Security Council resolutions.

    Res. 285 (Sep. 5, 1970) – “Demands the complete and immediate withdrawal of all Israeli armed forces from Lebanese territory.”

    Res. 298 (Sep. 25, 1971) – Recalls resolutions 252 and 267 and General Assembly resolutions 2253 and 2254 concerning Israel’s measures to annex Jerusalem, reaffirms “the principle that acquisition of territory by military conquest is inadmissible”, notes “the non-compliance by Israel” of the recalled resolutions, deplores Israel’s failure to respect the resolutions, confirms that Israel’s actions “are totally invalid”, and urgently calls on Israel to rescind its measures and take “no further steps in the occupied section of Jerusalem” to change the status of the city.

    Res. 313 (Feb. 28, 1972) – “Demands that Israel immediately desist and refrain from any ground and air military action against Lebanon and forthwith withdraw all its military forces from Lebanese territory.”

    Res. 316 (Jun. 26, 1972) – Deplores “the tragic loss of life resulting from all acts of violence”, expresses grave concern “at Israel’s failure to comply with Security Council resolutions” 262, 270, 280, 285, and 313 “calling on Israel to desist forthwith from any violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Lebanon”, calls on Israel to abide by the resolutions, and condemns “the repeated attacks of Israeli forces on Lebanese territory and population in violation of the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and Israel’s obligations thereunder”.

    Res. 317 (Jul. 21, 1972) – Notes resolution 316, deplores the fact that Israel had not yet released “Syrian and Lebanese military and security personnel abducted by Israeli armed forces from Lebanese territory” on June 21, 1972, and calls on Israel to release the prisoners.

    Res. 332 (Apr. 21, 1972) – “Condemns the repeated military attacks conducted by Israel against Lebanon and Israel’s violation of Lebanon’s territorial integrity and sovereignty” in violation of the U.N. Charter, the armistice agreement, and cease-fire resolutions.

    Res. 337 (Aug. 15, 1972) – Notes “the violation of Lebanon’s sovereignty and territorial integrity” by Israel “and the hijacking, by the Israeli air force, of a Lebanese civilian airliner on lease to Iraqi Airways”, expresses grave concern “that such an act carried out by Israel, a Member of the United Nations, constitutes a serious interference with international civil aviation and a violation of the Charter of the United Nations”, recognizes “that such an act could jeopardize the lives and safety of passengers and crew and violates the provisions of international conventions safeguarding civil aviation”, condemns Israel “for violating Lebanon’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and for the forcible diversion and seizure by the Israeli air force of a Lebanese airliner from Lebanon’s air space”, and considers that Israel’s actions constitute a violation of the armistice agreement, cease-fire resolutions, the U.N. Charter, “the international conventions on civil aviation and the principles of international law and morality”.

    Res. 347 (Apr. 24, 1974) – “Condemns Israel’s violation of Lebanon’s territorial integrity and sovereignty and calls once more on the Government of Israel to refrain from further military actions and threats against Lebanon”, and calls on Israel “to release and return to Lebanon the abducted Lebanese civilians”.

    Res. 425 (Mar. 19, 1978) – “Calls for strict respect for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Lebanon within its internationally recognized boundaries”, and “Calls upon Israel immediately to cease its military action against Lebanese territorial integrity and withdraw forthwith its forces from all Lebanese territory”.

    Res. 427 (May 3, 1978) – “Calls upon Israel to complete its withdrawal from all Lebanese territory without any further delay”.

    Res. 446 (Mar. 22, 1979) – Affirms “once more that the Fourth Geneva Convention … is applicable to the Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem”, “Determines that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East”, “Strongly deplores the failure of Israel to abide by” resolutions 237, 252, and 298, and General Assembly resolutions 2253 and 2254, and calls on Israel “as the occupying Power” to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention, to “rescind its previous measures and to desist from any action which would result in changing the legal status and geographical nature and materially affecting the demographic composition of the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, and, in particular, not to transfer parts of its own civilian population into the occupied Arab territories”.

    Res. 450 (Jun. 14, 1979) – “Strongly deplores acts of violence against Lebanon that have led to the displacement of civilians, including Palestinians, and brought about destruction and loss of innocent lives”, and calls on Israel to cease actions against Lebanon, “in particular its incursions into Lebanon and the assistance it continues to lend to irresponsible armed groups”.

    Res. 452 (Jul. 20, 1979) – Strongly deplores “the lack of co-operation of Israel” with the Security Council Commission “established under resolution 446 (1979) to examine the situation relating to settlements in the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem”, considers “that the policy of Israel in establishing settlements in the occupied Arab territories has no legal validity and constitutes a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention”, expresses deep concern at Israel’s policy of constructing settlements “in the occupied Arab territories, including Jerusalem, and its consequences for the local Arab and Palestinian population”, and calls on Israel to cease such activities.

    Res. 465 (Mar. 1, 1980) – Strongly deplores Israel’s refusal to co-operate with the Security Council Commission, regrets Israel’s “formal rejection of” resolutions 446 and 452, deplores Israel’s decision “to officially support Israeli settlement” in the occupied territories, expresses deep concern over Israel’s settlement policy “and its consequences for the local Arab and Palestinian population”, “Strongly deplores the decision of Israel to prohibit the free travel” of the mayor of Hebron “to appear before the Security Council”, and “Determines that all measures taken by Israel to change the physical character, demographic composition, institutional structure or status of the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, or any part thereof, have no legal validity and that Israel’s policy and practices of settling parts of its population and new immigrants in those territories constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention”.

    Res. 467 (Apr. 24, 1980) – “Condemns all actions contrary to” resolutions 425, 426, 427, 434, 444, 450, and 459 “and, in particular, strongly deplores” any “violation of Lebanese sovereignty and territorial integrity” and “Israel’s military intervention into Lebanon”.

    Res. 468 (May 8, 1980) – Expresses deep concern “at the expulsion by the Israeli military occupation authorities of the Mayors of Hebron and Halhoul and the Sharia Judge of Hebron” and “Calls upon the Government of Israel as occupying Power to rescind these illegal measures and facilitate the immediate return of the expelled Palestinian leaders so that they can resume the functions for which they were elected and appointed”.

    Res. 469 (May 20, 1980) – Recalls the Fourth Geneva Convention “and in particular article 1, which reads ‘The High Contracting Parties undertake to respect and to ensure respect for the present Convention in all circumstances,’ and article 49, which reads ‘Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from the occupied territory to the territory of the occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive”, “Strongly deplores the failure of the Government of Israel to implement Security Council resolution 468”, “Calls again upon the Government of Israel, as occupying Power, to rescind the illegal measures taken by the Israeli military occupation authorities in expelling the Mayors of Hebron and Halhoul and the Sharis Judge of Hebron, and to facilitate the immediate return of the expelled Palestinian leaders, so that they can resume their functions for which they were elected and appointed”.

    Res. 471 (Jun. 5, 1980) – Recalls “once again” the Fourth Geneva Convention, “and in particular article 27, which reads, ‘ Protected persons are entitled, in all circumstances, to respect for their persons… They shall at all times be humanely treated, and shall be protected especially against all acts of violence or threats thereof…’”, reaffirms the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention “to the Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem”, expresses deep concern “that the Jewish settlers in the occupied Arab territories are allowed to carry arms, thus enabling them to perpetrate crimes against the civilian Arab population”, “Condemns the assassination attempts against the Mayors of Nablus, Ramallah and Al Bireh and calls for the immediate apprehension and prosecution of the perpetrators of these crimes”, “Expresses deep concern that Israel, as the occupying Power, has failed to provide adequate protection to the civilian population in the occupied territories in conformity with the provisions of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War”, calls on Israel “to provide the victims with adequate compensation for the damage suffered as a result of these crimes”, “Calls again upon the government of Israel to respect and to comply with the provisions of” the Fourth Geneva Convention and “the relevant resolutions of the Security Council”, “Calls once again upon all States not to provide Israel with any assistance to be used specifically in connexion [sic] with settlements in the occupied territories”, “Reaffirms the overriding necessity to end the prolonged occupation of Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem”.

    Res. 476 (Jun. 30, 1980) – Reaffirms that “the acquisition of territory by force is inadmissible”, deplores “the persistence of Israel, in changing the physical character, demographic composition, institutional structure and the status of the Holy City of Jerusalem”, expresses grave concern “over the legislative steps initiated in the Israeli Knesset with the aim of changing the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem”, reaffirms “the overriding necessity to end the prolonged occupation of Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem”, “Strongly deplores the continued refusal of Israel, the occupying Power, to comply with the relevant resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly”, “Reconfirms that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, which purport to later the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem have no legal validity and constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention”, “Reiterates that all such measures … are null and void and must be rescinded in compliance with the relevant resolutions of the Security Council”, and “Urgently calls on Israel, the occupying Power, to abide by this and previous Security Council resolutions and to desist forthwith from persisting in the policy and measures affecting the character and status of the Holy city of Jerusalem”.

    Res. 478 (Aug. 20, 1980) – Reaffirms “again that the acquisition of territory by force is inadmissible”, notes “that Israel has not complied with resolution 476”, “Censures in the strongest terms the enactment by Israel of the ‘basic law’ on Jerusalem and the refusal to comply with relevant Security Council resolutions”, “Affirms that the enactment of the ‘basic law’ by Israel constitutes a violation of international law”, “Determines that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, which have altered or purport to alter the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem, and in particular the recent ‘basic law’ on Jerusalem, are null and void and must be rescinded forthwith”.

    Res. 484 (Dec. 19, 1980) – Expresses “grave concern at the expulsion by Israel of the Mayor of Hebron and the Mayor of Halhoul”, “Reaffirms the applicability of” the Fourth Geneva Convention “to all the Arab territories occupied by Israel in 1967”, “Calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to adhere to the provisions of the Convention”, and “Declares it imperative that the Mayor of Hebron and the Mayor of Halhoul be enabled to return to their homes and resume their responsibilities”.

    Res. 487 (Jun. 19, 1981) – Expresses full awareness “of the fact that Iraq has been a party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons since it came into force in 1970, that in accordance with that Treaty Iraq has accepted IAEA safeguards on all its nuclear activities, and that the Agency has testified that these safeguards have been satisfactorily applied to date”, notes “furthermore that Israel has not adhered to the non-proliferation Treaty”, expresses deep concern “about the danger to international peace and security created by the premeditated Israeli air attack on Iraqi nuclear installations on 7 June 1981, which could at any time explode the situation in the area, with grave consequences for the vital interests of all States”, “Strongly condemns the military attack by Israel in clear violation of the Charter of the United Nations and the norms of international conduct”, “Further considers that the said attack constitutes a serious threat to the entire IAEA safeguards regime which is the foundation of the non-proliferation Treaty”, “Fully recognizes the inalienable sovereign right of Iraq, and all other States, especially the developing countries, to establish programmes of technological and nuclear development to develop their economy and industry for peaceful purposes in accordance with their present and future needs and consistent with the internationally accepted objectives of preventing nuclear-weapons proliferation”, and “Calls upon Israel urgently to place its nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards”.

    Res. 497 (Dec. 17, 1981) – Reaffirms “that the acquisition of territory by force is inadmissible, in accordance with the United Nations Charter, the principles of international law, and relevant Security Council resolutions”, “Decides that the Israeli decision to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration in the occupied Syrian Golan Heights is null and void and without international legal effect”, “Demands that Israel, the occupying Power, should rescind forthwith its decision”, and “Determines that all the provisions of the” Fourth Geneva Convention “continue to apply to the Syrian territory occupied by Israel since June 1967”.

    Res. 501 (Feb. 25, 1982) – Reaffirms resolution 425 calling upon Israel to cease its military action against Lebanon.

    Res. 509 ( Jun. 6, 1982) – “Demands that Israel withdraw all its military forces forthwith and unconditionally to the internationally recognized boundaries of Lebanon”.

    Res. 515 (Jul. 29, 1982) – “Demands that the Government of Israel lift immediately the blockade of the city of Beirut in order to permit the dispatch of supplies to meet the urgent needs of the civilian population and allow the distribution of aid provided by United Nations agencies and by non-governmental organizations, particularly the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)”.

    Res. 517 (Aug. 4, 1982) – Expresses deep shock and alarm “by the deplorable consequences of the Israeli invasion of Beirut on 3 August 1982”, “Confirms once again its demand for an immediate cease-fire and withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon”, and “Censures Israel for its failure to comply with” resolutions 508, 509, 512, 513, 515, and 516.

    Res. 518 (Aug. 12, 1982) – “Demands that Israel and all parties to the conflict observe strictly the terms of Security Council resolutions relevant to the immediate cessation of all military activities within Lebanon and, particularly, in and around Beirut”, “Demands the immediate lifting of all restrictions on the city of Beirut in order to permit the free entry of supplies to meet the urgent needs of the civilian population in Beirut”.

    Res. 520 (Sep. 17, 1982) – “Condemns the recent Israeli incursions into Beirut in violation of the cease-fire agreements and of Security Council resolutions”, and “Demands an immediate return to the positions occupied by Israel before” September 15, 1982 “as a first step towards the full implementation of Security Council resolutions”.

    Res. 521 (Sep. 19, 1982) – “Condemns the criminal massacre of Palestinian civilians in Beirut” in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps.

    Res. 573 (Oct. 4, 1985) – “Condemns vigorously the act of armed aggression perpetrated by Israel against Tunisian territory in flagrant violation of the Charter of the United Nations, international law and norms of conduct”.

    Res. 592 (Dec. 8, 1986) – Reaffirms that the Fourth Geneva Convention “is applicable to the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem”, and “Strongly deplores the opening of fire by the Israeli army resulting in the death and the wounding of defenceless students”.

    Res. 605 (Dec. 22, 1987) – “Strongly deplores those policies and practices of Israel, the occupying Power, which violate the human rights of the Palestinian people in the occupied territories, and in particular the opening of fire by the Israeli army, resulting in the killing and wounding of defenceless Palestinian civilians”, and reaffirms the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention “to the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem”.

    Res. 607 (Jan. 5, 1988) – Expresses “grave concern over the situation in the occupied Palestinian territories”, notes “the decision of Israel, the occupying Power, to ‘continue the deportation’ of Palestinian civilians in the occupied territories”, “Reaffirms once again” the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention “to Palestinian and other Arab territories, occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem”, “Calls upon Israel to refrain from deporting any Palestinian civilians from the occupied territories”, and “Strongly requests Israel, the occupying Power, to abide by its obligations arising from the Convention”.

    Res. 608 (Jan. 14, 1988) – Reaffirms resolution 607, expresses “deep regret that Israel, the occupying Power, has, in defiance of that resolution, deported Palestinian civilians”, and “Calls upon Israel to rescind the order to deport Palestinian civilians and to ensure the safe and immediate return to the occupied Palestinian territories of those already deported”.

    Res. 611 (Apr. 25, 1988) – Notes “with concern that the aggression perpetrated” by Israelis on April 16, 1988 “in the locality of Sidi Bou Said”, Tunisia, “has caused loss of human life, particularly the assassination of Mr. Khalil El Wazir”, and “Condemns vigorously the aggression perpetrated … against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Tunisia in flagrant violation of the Charter of the United Nations, international law and norms of conduct”.

    Res. 636 (Jul. 6, 1989) – Reaffirms resolutions 607 and 608, notes “that Israel, the occupying Power, has once again, in defiance of those resolutions, deported eight Palestinian civilians on 29 June 1989”, Expresses deep regret “the continuing deportation by Israel, the occupying Power, of Palestinian civilians”, “Calls upon Israel to ensure the safe and immediate return to the occupied Palestinian territories of those deported and to desist forthwith from deporting any other Palestinian civilians”, and “Reaffirms that” the Fourth Geneva Convention “is applicable to the Palestinian territories, occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem, and to other occupied Arab territories”.

    Res. 641 (Aug. 30, 1989) – Reaffirms resolutions 607, 608, and 636, notes that Israel “has once again, in defiance of those resolutions, deported five Palestinian civilians on 27 August 1989”, and “Deplores the continuing deportation by Israel, the occupying Power, of Palestinian civilians”.

    Res. 672 (Oct. 12, 1990) – “Expresses alarm at the violence which took place” on October 8, 1990, “at the Al Haram al Shareef and other Holy Places of Jerusalem resulting in over twenty Palestinian deaths and to the injury of more than one hundred and fifty people, including Palestinian civilians and innocent worshippers”, “Condemns especially the acts of violence committed by the Israeli forces resulting in injuries and loss of human life”, and “Requests, in connection with the decision of the Secretary-General to send a mission to the region, which the Council welcomes, that he submit a report to it before the end of October 1990 containing his findings and conclusions and that he use as appropriate all the resources of the United Nations in the region in carrying out the mission.”

    Res. 673 (Oct. 24, 1990) – “Deplores the refusal of the Israeli Government to receive the mission of the Secretary-General to the region”, and “Urges the Israeli Government to reconsider its decision and insists that it comply fully with resolution 672 (1990) and to permit the mission of the Secretary-General to proceed in keeping with its purpose”.

    Res. 681 (Dec. 20, 1990) – Reaffirms “the obligations of Member States under the United Nations Charter”, reaffirms “also the principle of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war”, expresses alarm “by the decision of the Government of Israel to deport four Palestinians from the occupied territories in contravention of its obligations under the Fourth Geneva Convention” in contravention to resolutions 607, 608, 636, and 641, “Expresses its grave concern over the rejection by Israel of Security Council resolutions” 672 and 673, and “Deplores the decision by the Government of Israel, the occupying Power, to resume deportations of Palestinian civilians in the occupied territories”.

    Res. 694 (May 24, 1991) – Reaffirms resolution 681 calling on Israel to respect the Fourth Geneva Convention, notes “with deep concern and consternation that Israel has, in violation of its obligations under the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, and acting in opposition to relevant Security Council resolutions, and to the detriment of efforts to achieve a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East, deported four Palestinian civilians” on May 18, 1991, “Declares that the action of the Israeli authorities of deporting four Palestinians … is in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention …, which is applicable to all the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem”, and “Deplores this action and reiterates that Israel, the occupying Power, refrain from deporting any Palestinian civilian from the occupied territories and ensure the safe and immediate return of all those deported”.

    Res. 726 (Jan. 6, 1992) – Recalls resolutions 607, 608, 636, 641, and 694 calling on Israel to respect the Fourth Geneva Convention, “Strongly condemns the decision of Israel, the occupying Power, to resume deportations of Palestinian civilians”, “Reaffirms the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention … to all the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem”, and “requests Israel, the occupying Power, to ensure the safe and immediate return to the occupied territories of all those deported”.

    Res. 799 (Dec. 18, 1992) – Reaffirms resolutions 607, 608, 636, 641, 681, 694, and 726 calling on Israel to respect the Fourth Geneva Convention, notes “with deep concern that Israel, the occupying Power, in contravention of its obligations under the Fourth Geneva Convention …, deported to Lebanon” on December 17, 1992 “hundreds of Palestinian civilians from the territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jersualem”, “Strongly condemns the action taken by Israel, the occupying Power, to deport hundreds of Palestinian civilians, and expresses its firm opposition to any such deportation by Israel”, “Reaffirms the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention … to all the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem, and affirms that deportation of civilians constitutes a contravention of its obligations under the Convention”, and “Demands that Israel, the occupying Power, ensure the safe and immediate return to the occupied territories of all those deported”.

    Res. 904 (Mar. 18, 1994) – Expresses shock at “the appalling massacre committed against Palestinian worshippers in the Mosque of Ibrahim in Hebron” on February 25, 1994 by Jewish settler Baruch Goldstein “during the holy month of Ramadan”, expresses grave concern with “the consequent Palestinian casualties in the occupied Palestinian territory as a result of the massacre, which underlines the need to provide protection and security for the Palestinian people”, notes “the condemnation of this massacre by the entire international community”, “Strongly condemns the massacre in Hebron and its aftermath which took the lives of more than fifty Palestinian civilians and injured several hundred others”, and “Calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to continue to take and implement measures, including, inter alia, confiscation of arms, with the aim of preventing illegal acts of violence by Israeli settlers”.

    Res. 1073 (Sep. 28, 1996) – Expresses “deep concern about the tragic events in Jerusalem and the areas of Nablus, Ramallah, Bethlehem and the Gaza Strip, which resulted in a high number of deaths and injuries among the Palestinian civilians, and concerned also about the clashes between the Israeli army and the Palestinian police and the casualties on both sides”, and “Calls for the safety and protection for Palestinian civilians to be ensured”.

    Res. 1322 (Oct. 7, 2000) – Expresses deep concern “by the tragic events that have taken place” since September 28, 2000 “that have led to numerous deaths and injuries, mostly among Palestinians”, “Deplores the provocation carried out at Al-Haram Al-Sharif in Jerusalem” on September 28, 2000 “and the subsequent violence there and at other Holy Places, as well as in other areas throughout the territories occupied by Israel since 1967, resulting in over 80 Palestinian deaths and many other casualties”, “Condemns acts of violence, especially the excessive use of force against Palestinians, resulting in injury and loss of human life”, and “Calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by its legal obligations and its responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention”.

    Res. 1402 (Mar. 30, 2002) – Expresses grave concern “at the further deterioration of the situation, including the recent suicide bombings in Israel and the military attack against the headquarters of the president of the Palestinian Authority”, “Calls upon both parties to move immediately to a meaningful cease-fire” and “calls for the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Palestinian cities, including Ramallah”.

    Res. 1403 (Apr. 4, 2002) – Expresses grave concern “at the further deterioration of the situation on the ground” and “Demands the implementation of its resolution 1402 (2002) without delay”.

    Res. 1405 (Apr. 19, 2002) – Expresses concern for “the dire humanitarian situation of the Palestinian civilian population, in particular reports from the Jenin refugee camp of an unknown number of deaths and destruction”, calls for “the lifting of restrictions imposed, in particular in Jenin, on the operations of humanitarian organizations, including the International Committee of the Red Cross and United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East”, and “Emphasizes the urgency of access of medical and humanitarian organizations to the Palestinian civilian population”.

    Res. 1435 (Sep. 24, 2002) – Expresses grave concern “at the reoccupation of the headquarters of the President of the Palestinian Authority in the City of Ramallah that took place” on September 19, 2002, demands “its immediate end”, expresses alarm “at the reoccupation of Palestinian cities as well as the severe restrictions imposed on the freedom of movement of persons and goods, and gravely concerned at the humanitarian crisis being faced by the Palestinian people”, reiterates “the need for respect in all circumstances of international humanitarian law, including the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War”, “Demands that Israel immediately cease measures in and around Ramallah including the destruction of Palestinian civilian and security infrastructure”, and “Demands also the expeditious withdrawal of the Israeli occupying forces from Palestinian cities towards the return to the positions held prior to September 2000”.

    Res. 1544 (May 19, 2004) – Reaffirms resolutions 242, 338, 446, 1322, 1397, 1402, 1405, 1435, and 1515, reiterates “the obligation of Israel, the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by its legal obligations and responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War”, calls “on Israel to address its security needs within the boundaries of international law”, expresses “grave concern at the continued deterioration of the situation on the ground in the territory occupied by Israel since 1967”, condemns “the killing of Palestinian civilians that took place in the Rafah area”, expresses grave concern “by the recent demolition of homes committed by Israel, the occupying Power, in the Rafah refugee camp”, reaffirms “its support for the Road Map, endorsed in resolution 1515”, “Calls on Israel to respect its obligations under international humanitarian law, and insists, in particular, on its obligation not to undertake demolition of homes contrary to that law”, and “Calls on both parties to immediately implement their obligations under the Road Map”.

    Res. 1701 (Aug. 11, 2006) – Expresses “its utmost concern at the continuing escalation of hostilities in Lebanon and in Israel” that “has already caused hundreds of deaths and injuries” and “extensive damage to civilian infrastructure and hundreds of thousands of internally displaced persons”, and “Calls for a full cessation of hostilities” including “the immediate cessation by Israel of all offensive military operations”.

    Res. 1860 (Jan. 8, 2009) – Expresses “grave concern at the escalation of violence and the deterioration of the situation, in particular the resulting heavy civilian casualties since the refusal to extend the period of calm”, expresses “grave concern also at the deepening humanitarian crisis in Gaza”, “calls for an immediate, durable and fully respected ceasefire, leading to the full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza”, “Calls for the unimpeded provision and distribution throughout Gaza of humanitarian assistance, including of food, fuel and medical treatment”, and “Condemns all violence and hostilities directed against civilians and all acts of terrorism”.

    • Thanks: Colin Wright
  216. @bayviking

    “Two of Sirhan Sirhan’s brothers peddled heroin for Johnny Roselli”

    Interesting. A couple of recent books on the RFK assassination explore the company kept by Sirhan in the months leading up to the murder: a combination of Sirhan’s colleagues at Santa Anita Park and the people he met at a Rosicrucian lodge in Pasadena. The Rosicrucian thing seems odd but then there’s David Ferrie’s involvement with Jesuit/Sabbatean ritual practices and Charlie Manson’s connection to The Process Church, a London-based Scientology splinter faction led by an MI6 asset. British Intelligence has always been keen on using occult groups as a proxy for trafficking and psychological warfare experimentation. The CIA followed their example. If Roselli had any connections to Sirhan’s family that would solidify Langley’s involvement in the assassination.

    • Replies: @bayviking
  217. @Katy

    “Looks like Barr was trying to clean up CIA tracks.”

    On the Epstein matter and CIA involvement in the false Russian collusion case against Trump. Barr played the Alexander Haig role in Trump’s last two years in office.

  218. geokat62 says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    There are countless conflicts in the world where more people have died in the last year than have in the last 50 of the Israel-Palestine conflict.

    You need to broaden the scope before tallying the deaths of the I/P conflict. It should be expanded to include the casualties associated with the neocon’s desire to remake the ME by launching the GWOT, the purpose of which was to make the jungle a little safer for the villa.

    In response to Lilienthal’s question What Price Israel?, I did a little accounting of the price the Zionist state (and mostly others) has paid so far to ensure the security of “the villa in the jungle.”

    [MORE]

    My starting point is the June ’67 war, in which Israel conquered, among other lands, the West Bank (including East Jerusalem), the Stolen Heights, and the Gaza Strip. In violation of international law, they immediately started placing “facts on the ground.”

    Although Israel formally “disengaged” from Gaza in 2005, the de facto occupation of OPT has now lasted over half a century. Rather than pursuing a policy of “land for peace,” Israel decided to take a Clean Break (a policy paper presented to Bibi Netanyahu in 1996 by a study group led by Richard Perle that was later adopted by GWB as the basis of US foreign policy in the ME following 9/11) and has instead been pursuing a policy of “peace for peace” (don’t you recall how Condi Rice infamously described this policy when Israel attacked Lebanon in 2006… these are “the birth pangs of a new ME”

    1. 1982 Lebanon War (1982-1985)

    • Israelis killed: IDF 657, civilians 10
    • Lebanese, Palestinian, and Syrian killed: 17,285 (overwhelming majority civilians)

    2. First Intifada (1987-1993)

    • Israelis killed: IDF 60, civilians 100
    • Palestinians killed: 2,162 (overwhelming majority civilians)

    3. UN Sanctions against Iraq (1990-2003)

    Cui Bono? In 1991, Paul H. Lewis wrote in the New York Times:
    “Ever since the trade embargo was imposed on Aug. 6, after the invasion of Kuwait, the United States has argued against any premature relaxation in the belief that by making life uncomfortable for the Iraqi people it will eventually encourage them to remove President Saddam Hussein from power.”
    It should also be noted that Saddam was underwriting the family members of Palestinian suicide bombers to the tune of $25,000. He also dropped 27 Scud missiles on Israel during the first Gulf War in 1990-91.

    “I think this is a very hard choice, but the price — we think the price is worth it.” Madeleine Albright (whose real name is Marie Jana Korbel), U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, in reply to Lesley Stahl’s question “We have heard that half a million children have died. I mean, that’s more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?”

    • 500,000 Iraqi children killed

    4. Operation Defensive Shield (2002)

    • Israelis killed: IDF 30
    • Palestinians killed: 497 (overwhelming majority civilians)

    5. Iraq War (2003-2012)
    Cui Bono? Mearsheimer and Walt in Ch 8 of their book The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy provide the incriminating evidence that the Iraq war was pushed by the Lobby to enhance Israel’s security:

    Israel’s enthusiasm for war eventually led some of its allies in America to tell Israeli officials to damp down their hawkish rhetoric, lest the war look like it was being fought for Israel. In the fall of 2002, for example, a group of American political consultants known as the Israel Project circulated a six-page memorandum to key Israelis and pro-Israel leaders in the United States. The memo was titled “Talking about Iraq” and was intended as a guide for public statements about the war. “If your goal is regime change, you must be much more careful with your language because of the potential backlash. You do not want Americans to believe that the war on Iraq is being waged to protect Israel rather than to protect America.” http://mailstar.net/iraq-war.html

    It’s important to remember that the removal of Saddam was the prerequisite to Israel’s “mowing the lawn” campaigns and the invasion of Lebanon, which commenced soon after Saddam was deposed.

    • Iraqi deaths: 500,000 (overwhelming majority civilians)
    • American soldiers killed: 4,500

    6. Second Lebanon War (2006)

    • Israelis killed: IDF 121, civilians 43
    • Lebanese citizens: ~1,200

    7. Operation Summer Rains (2006)

    • Israelis killed: IDF 7
    • Palestinians killed: 402 (just under half civilians)

    8. Operation Cast Lead (2008-2009)

    • Israelis killed: IDF 10, civilians 3
    • Palestinians killed: militants ~700, civilians ~700

    9. Operation Pillar of Defense (2012)

    • Israelis killed: IDF 2, civilians 4
    • Palestinians killed: militants ~100, civilians ~100

    10. Operation Protective Edge (2014)

    • Israelis killed: IDF 65, civilians 6
    • Palestinians killed: ~2,100 (overwhelming majority civilians)

    11. Libyan Civil War (2011)
    Cui Bono?
    “Senior Israeli government officials were quoted as saying that ‘there is no reason for Israel to be sorry over the loss of Gaddafi’ as Muammar Gaddafi ‘supported terror and advocated terror against Israelis all over the world.’”
    “Gaddafi was a major financier of the “Black September Movement” which perpetrated the Munich massacre at the 1972 Summer Olympics, …”
    “Gaddafi also became a strong supporter of the Palestine Liberation Organization, which ultimately harmed Libya’s relations with Egypt when in 1979 Egypt pursued a peace agreement with Israel.”
    • death toll: 2,500-25,000 (overwhelming majority civilians)

    12. Syrian Civil War (2011-?)

    Cui Bono?
    “New York Times correspondent Jodi Rudoren reports: ‘More quietly, Israelis have increasingly argued that the best outcome for Syria’s two-and-a-half-year-old civil war, at least for the moment, is no outcome. ‘Whereas Alon Pinkas, Israel’s former consul general in New York, told Rudoren: ‘Let them both bleed, hemorrhage to death: that’s the strategic thinking here. As long as this lingers, there’s no real threat from Syria.’”
    • death toll: 191,000 (overwhelming majority civilians)

    Tally to date:

    • Israelis killed 1,108
    • Arabs killed ~1,200,000

    That’s a ratio of just under 1,200 : 1!

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  219. geokat62 says:
    @Pincher Martin

    I’ve probably read far more on Kennedy and his administration than anyone here. (See my post #302 for a partial bibliography.)

    When I scanned the several books listed under the category JFK Assassination Books (Pro-Conspiracy), I noticed you included this title:

    Final Judgment: The Missing Link in the JFK Assassination Conspiracy, Volume 2 (2017)

    Do you inadvertently neglect to include Volume I, which contains the main text of the book (Volume 2 comprises only the detailed appendices referenced in the main body of the book)?

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  220. @anonymous

    As many experts have noted, projection is a characteristic feature of the psychopathology of toxic semitism — as anon is kind enough to illustrate here:

    “CIA” has lots of you “foreign propaganda guys. “

    Fact check: https://www.972mag.com/hasbara-why-does-the-world-fail-to-understand-us/

    https://forvo.com/word/sayanim/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katsa#Operation

    https://www.huffpost.com/entry/mossads-little-helpers_b_487173

    Etc. Yeah that’s gonna be FALSE. Clearly just projection::

    None of “you” [he means “you goyim”] ever explain how Israel… penetrated government and law enforcement from top to bottom.

    This is an odd claim. Is the hasbarat claiming that the North American economic zone is entirely devoid of members of the Tribe? Because the Jewish Virtual Library claims that there are 7.15 million of them. See “sayanim” above.

    Or is is he just trying to claim that there are hardly any jews currently living in the US who moved there from Palestine? Even that is clearly false there are >a title=”https://www.momentmag.com/new-israeli-americans/&#8221; href=”https://www.momentmag.com/new-israeli-americans/”<over 300,000 of them. Top Biden megadonor Haim “Bomb Iran” Saban [an IDF veteran and fanatical Israel Firster who moved to the US from Palestine himself] even backs a lobbying group specifically for the interests of so-called Israeli-Americans.

    Yes, it’s clear that anon is in dire need of a refresher course in semitic supremacist shilling. Or at least he could read the manual occasionally…

  221. S says:

    After RFK’s assassination does anyone know if there were examples of the corporate media deliberately sending messages of a disrespectful nature about the shooting?

    For JFK there seemed to be multiple such examples.

    The centerfold ad below appeared in the ‘Warren Commision’ issue of Life magazine for Oct 2, 1964. The issue featured on the cover stills from the Zapruder film of Kennedy being shot while Jackie in her now famous pink dress attempts to protect him, all whilst in a Lincoln Continental.

    Having a two page Lincoln Continental ad with a Jackie look alike in that particular issue seems incredibly crass at minimum, if not being subtly disrespectful.

    Worse was an I-Spy episode from about 1966 which in one scene recreated the JFK assassination complete with a Jackie lookalike in a pink dress and a pill box hat. Being I-Spy is something of a comedy, this seemed almost an attempt at outright mockery of the event.

    [MORE]

  222. @Chris Moore

    You know absolutely nothing about what Algerian Muslims did to Europe for a thousand years before France ended it.

    They’re just another element of the 6,000 Year Old Earth club.

    So you’re trying to claim that the 1000 year history of the enslavement of millions of White Europeans by the Barbary States is documented in the Bible somewhere? Do you have an actual citation for that, or are you just blabbering aimlessly?

    • Replies: @Chris Moore
  223. Ron Unz says:
    @Pincher Martin

    I’ve read all of Ron Unz’s recommended books on JFK and Israel (post #73)…I’ve probably read far more on Kennedy and his administration than anyone here. (See my post #302 for a partial bibliography.) I dare say I’m also better informed about the era than anyone here…Oswald alone killed Kennedy.

    Actually, one book that isn’t on your list is Oswald and the CIA by Prof. John Newman. Lysias, who has a strong national security background, had noted it at the time, and a couple of weeks ago I finally had a chance to read the epilogue to the 2008 paperback edition, which he had highly recommended.

    Newman spent twenty years in Military Intelligence and then became a professor of history at the University of Maryland. He seems to have an exceptionally good understanding of the technical details of bureaucratic intelligence files, and based upon his very persuasive analysis, it seems overwhelmingly likely that Oswald was the exact patsy he claimed. Moreover, he provides very strong evidence that Angleton was the crucial CIA figure involved in the JFK Assassination plot, a suggest that perfectly accords with Piper’s analysis.

    Based upon that analysis of the intelligence files, Newman argues that the key element of the plot was to establish (false) links between Oswald and the Soviets, especially a particular assassination expert in their KGB. Once that fictional trail had been created, the plotters could raise the terrible specter of war with Russia in order to blackmail Warren, various senators, and other American elites into suppressing all conflicting evidence and transforming Oswald into a lone gunman.

    Newman seems to really know his stuff and makes an extremely strong case.

    • Agree: Laurent Guyénot
    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  224. @R2b

    Successful? What about Hinkley?

  225. Very good article.

    Let me just add–if it has not been added in the comments above–the physical dismantling of the walls and woodwork in order to hide the bullets’ trajectories by the LAPD, and the tape of the interrogation of the Chicana witness who saw the girl in the polka dot dress and her male companion come down the back exit steps crowing that they had “done it.” The interrogation tape suddenly surfaced 10 years ago and shows clearly the 20-something Chicana being browbeaten by a seasoned CIA operative into changing her eye witness account.

    You ask the question as to how Sirhan got in the pantry. According to the eyewitness, she saw the girl, her male accomplice and Sirhan coming in the back entrance and then the girl and her male accomplice leaving with the girl crowing that they had done it they had got Bobby.

    Also there is credible evidence that not Mankiewicz, but some anonymous security person behind Bobby at the podium steered him into the pantry.

    While it is clear that Israel may have instigated it, it is also clear that the LAPD and the CIA were supportive and complicit.

    • Thanks: Laurent Guyénot
  226. gatobart says:

    So I’ve done the work. You clearly have not. Oswald alone killed Kennedy.

    No, You certainly not. You don’t know what you are talking about. I could spend the rest of this June, 8, 2021 just listing the elements of this case that make of LHO the set up guy and even by midnight I wouldn’t be done. But let us mention just a few facts and one indisputable proof, that anyone can verify in their own home, that Oswald was the fall guy.

    a) As others have mentioned, the WC Report was nothing more than a pack of lies. Many witnesses were pressured into given the testimony Commissioners wanted of them so they could build their fictional account of Oswald’s steps after the assassination. For example he was never ever in the bus they said in the report he took two blocks from the TSBD. The driver of that bus remembered all the passengers he had had in that particular circuit, about half a dozen, and he recalled only one young man among them who could have been Oswald. But days later the same man got again aboard his bus and he was able to identify him. Of course he wasn’t Oswald. The man recognized he was indeed that passenger The WC simply ignored this fact and kept the initial statement from the driver. To this day no one knows how LHO actually went to the rooming house in Oak Cliff even if we may have the answer in the words of Deputy Sheriff Roger Craig, who declared having seen ten minutes after the shooting a young man he identified as Oswald running down the slope in front of the TSBD to Elm Street where he was picked up by a Rambler and taken in the direction of Oak Cliff. This single testimony not only ruined his career but also made of him the target of death threats until the day he was found dead in mysterious circumstances. Of course the testimony of a seasoned police officer with many years of experience was worthless when going against the official narrative, specially if proving that contrary to the myth, LHO wasn’t at all acting alone in those crucial minutes.

    [MORE]

    b) As the WC report states, Oswald took that bus and got off it a few blocks away and then proceed to take a taxi and in it went to his rooming house. When that particular taxi was located, the driver vaguely recognized him but he couldn’t be sure. Furthermore, his log didn’t confirm the narrative as there was no ride in it during that span of time that could be made fit the WC’s hypothesis. I think that according to the taxi log, the taxi should have been able to reach the rooming house in only six minutes, as the landlady had seen him arrive exactly at 1.0 PM. The taxi ride was reconstituted by police and it proved to be useless to confirm it anyway, they couldn’t make a car arrive in 6 minutes to the house, not even using specially adapted police cruisers. All in all, there was no way to prove that Oswald ever took that bus, got off it and went home in a taxi, the most likely thing all that never happened, yet the Warren Commission kept this falsehood in their report as if it was true.

    c) Oswald was at best a mediocre shot and nobody has ever been able to prove he could have done the shots in the way described by the WC. Many firing tests were organized later in pre-arranged settings with the participation of world class marksmen and military snipers and no one was able to reproduce what the WC attributed to him, not even using a stationary target. Furthermore, every experts marksman who visited the TSBD along the years leaned out of the window in the 6th floor and everyone came to the same conclusion. There was no way Oswald could have done what the WC said he did from that position, let alone against a moving disappearing target. The Dallas PD got so pizzed off with time that they simply closed access to the window, they installed a crystal wall several meters from it to prevent anyone else coming to it in the future.

    And I could go on and on. But here is the evidence of the set up; the three backyard pictures of Oswald holding a rifle. They have been named A, B and C. Marina Oswald remembered having taken several pictures in April 1962 but she didn’t remember the number of them. It can be easily proven that both pictures B and C are authentic, they were actually shot in that setting, at the same time and from the same position, and that Photo A, the one were Oswald is holding the Manlicher Carcano is a fake, a fabrication. That picture was never taken there, most likely in some stage only weeks before the shooting.. How that can be proven:

    Take a good quality copy of every picture, all at the same scale so they can be made coincide one with the other or better yet, transparencies of them.. Now, study the shadows in the background. After a careful examination you will conclude that they were all taken from the same position, about 1.5 m. above the ground and that the camera didn’t move more than a couple of inches sideways and at most a foot back or forward during the shooting. The practically identical shadows rule any greater camera displacement during the session. Now if you compare both vertical elements, the wooden post of the stairs and the corner of the shed at the right, with transparencies or simply making a big hole in the center of one picture and putting it over the other, they should completely coincide if the pictures are at the same scale. Do this with B and C and you’ll see it works, both vertical elements practically coincide. Now, take any picture, B or C, and try to do the same with picture A, You can’t, you will never be able to make those two vertical elements coincide because the post and the shed’s corner in A are not parallel…! How is that…? Because they “open up” in A, which means picture A couldn’t have possibly been shot from 1.5 m. above the ground but, as the result of perspective, at a height much lower, at something like .5 m. That is the only logical way why both vertical elements don’t appear parallel anymore but forming something like a “V”. But this cannot be, as I said the shadows in the background indisputably show that the pictures were all shot form the same point in space. To make sure I built a small cardboard model of the backyard and the observation confirmed my analysis of the the pictures. I tried to look at the model from a position where the two vertical elements shewed the same angle as in picture A and to get picture A with that condition I would have had to shot it almost from ground level. Conclusion. Picture A wasn’t taken in that backyard. It was most likely taken in front of an artificial stage built with that purpose. I was even able to determine the inclination towards the camera of the stage to get that angle between shed and post and that resulted to be about 11 degree. That is not conspiracy theory, that is physics, optics, applied to the case, in the study of the backyard pictures and anyone can do the same analysis and prove me wrong.

    As said, you haven’t done any serious work if any. You got no idea what you are talking about.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  227. Great article, part II.

    One other thing: the case of the amateur photographer who followed Bobby into the pantry taking shots all along. The FBI or the LAPD demanded his film roll promising to return it after developing it and and examining it. They did not, he failed a complaint and a year or more later, they returned his developed film–minus multiple frames.

    Evidently he had inadvertently captured the true assassin and this was suppressed not by Israel but by American law enforcement, obviously complicit in the assassination and its cover up.

    • Replies: @BlackFlag
  228. Anonymous[170] • Disclaimer says:
    @Pincher Martin

    Yes you may know who the shooter is, but that’s all you know for you don’t know the names and faces of the players, Oswald never shot JFK tho he was tagged with it, but the other alphabets were involved in it from the joint chiefs to the CIA to the FBI and the select group in congress who wrote up the fairy tale that passed for an investigation, as Ethel Kennedy said it was a right-wing conspiracy and without a doubt she was right.

  229. gatobart says:

    Oops. I recognize that someone with good observational skills could be tempted to prove me wrong about my hypothesis of the camera being set almost on ground level to be able to show the two vertical elements “opening up” at the top, when the case should be the contrary. And they would be right. My mistake. (I did perform this experiment many years ago) What I meant is that both the corner of the shed and the wooden post will appear as in picture A ONLY if this is something of an artificial stage inclined towards the camera at some 11 degree. I know it sounds ridiculous, why would someone do something like that, but that is the indisputable conclusion of the test (which anyone can reproduce at home). That is what picture A is showing us.

    On the other hand, this would explain the curious posture of Oswald’s body in this picture. Many of those studying this picture have concluded that such position would have been unsustainable for a human body and that he should have fallen to the right. Yet he is there, perfectly comfortable in that stance. The inclined stage would explain this, put Oswald vertical and the real inclination of the stage will come out naturally.

  230. Anonymous[170] • Disclaimer says:
    @War for Blair Mountain

    I hope your corn beef and cabbage doesn’t give you heart burn, but your never ending line of bullshit gives everyone else one..

  231. @BlackFlag

    ‘Darlan’s killer, Bonnier de La Chapelle, was executed by the authorities, not assassinated.’

    Yes — but with remarkable haste. Within approximately forty hours, in fact.

  232. @geokat62

    Even if we accept your “Israelis are to blame for everything everyone else does” view, it still doesn’t explain why ~0% of the deaths from conflict leads to Israel receiving 50% of the UN condemnations, as those condemnations do not regards your expanded theories of Israeli responsibility.

    It is also doesn’t dispute my point that Israel receives a tremendous amount of negative international attention.

    I get the feeling that you did not try to write a relevant reply; instead you copied and pasted a bunch of tangential propaganda you have stored up. I could be mistaken.

    • Replies: @geokat62
  233. @Triteleia Laxa

    ‘Why do ~0% of the deaths, get almost 50% of the total condemnations?’

    Perhaps you could name another state that over the course of the last seventy years has attacked every single one of its neighbors, several more besides, and is waging what amounts to war on her gentile subjects, Syria, and Iran right now?

    It’s interesting. Neither Nazi Germany nor Soviet Russia actually attacked all their neighbors. Israel has.

    But you don’t think that calls for censure.

  234. Sparkon says:
    @Pincher Martin

    I suggest you look up Lawrent [sic] Guyénot’s contribution at The Unz Review from last December called “Remember the Kennedys: A Message from a Frenchman with Irish Music” and look at the comment section. I dominated it.

    I wiped up the floor with you in that debate, Martin. The only thing you dominated was word count.

    I dare say I’m also better informed about the era than anyone here.

    Only in your wildest fantasies, Slick.

    By this late date, anyone promoting the lies that Oswald killed JFK, and Sirhan killed RFK is either not playing with a full deck, or is here on assignment.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  235. geokat62 says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    It is also doesn’t dispute my point that Israel receives a tremendous amount of negative international attention.

    LOL! Compare and contrast the media coverage apartheid South Africa received to what ApartheidIsrael is receiving. It’s night and day… and we all know the reason why, don’t we?

    • Agree: Colin Wright
    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
    , @Wielgus
  236. @Ron Unz

    I’ll give it a read. His book about Vietnam and JFK is already on my to-read list.

  237. BlackFlag says:
    @Commentator Mike

    Yes, this is a good theory. It would explain why Noguchi said he wasn’t satisfied that the bullet came from Sirhan’s weapon, why they never checked if it came from Cesar, the witnesses who saw drawn guns, the Lookheed security peoples’ weapons, the extra bullets, the tampered and destroyed evidence. But I wonder if the LAPD and other authorities would go to such lengths to protect a member of the security.

  238. @Sparkon

    I wiped up the floor with you in that debate, Martin. The only thing you dominated was word count.

    I’m sorry, but were you in that debate? I hardly even noticed you among my interlocutors. Perhaps because you felt that victory comes to those who post very little and say even less.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  239. BlackFlag says:
    @restless94110

    Are you referring to Enyart or a 2nd amateur photographer? If the former, it’s been discussed above and your facts are quite a bit off.

    • Replies: @restless94110
  240. @Lucy Lipinska

    The “patriotic” right-wingers here in Sweden – who unsurprisingly have Israel’s flag in their Twitter profile, are convinced that Arabs killed the JFK and his brother because of the Kennedy’s love for Israel and the Jewish people. No point to argue with them, if one doesn’t wish to be declared an anti-Semite, as most Swedes believe that Jews and Israel are, unlike Sweden’s current government- pro-White, because “Jews are fighting against Arabs”. This outlook is shared by Sweden’s “nationalist” party, Sweden Democrats (Sverigedemokraterna), whoze high representative, Björn Söder, the other week had critisized Sweden’s government for not hoisting Israel’s flag. According to the above mentioned Björn Söder, Sweden should this way express its solidarity with the Jewish people.

    It’s deliberate. That’s how the dialectic is constructed/ managed. You can pick either:

    Thesis: Anti-White, pro-open borders, anti-“Islamophobia”, anti-“fascism”, etc.: this side is “allowed” to express a limited amount of anti-Zionism [as long as they phrase it in terms of “White supremacism,” “apartheid,” etc. rather than semitic supremacism. But if they say anything negative about systemic semitism in general… they’re done.

    Antithesis: Mild civic nationalism, ineffective advocacy for patriotic immigration reform, Islamo-skepticism, still “anti-fascist” [liberals are the REAL “fascists!”], etc. — this side absolutely must show unreserved support for the Zionist settler-colonialists in Palestine if they want to avoid deplatforming and/ or legal consequences.

    You’ll still end up with the same synthesis: systemic semitism tightens its grip; more non-White immigration and more support for Israel.

    This is what’s known as a “kosher sandwich” aka “Bagelian dialectic.”

    The highly confusing thing in it is that the by Jews owned MSM media never stop ranting about Sweden Democrat party being “fascist”.

    Jews — diaspora ones in particular, but Israelis, too — distrust/ feel threatened by any kind of nationalist movement among White goyim, no matter how much they slobber over Israel. See also people like Geert Wilders and Tommy Robinson — directly funded by Zionists, yet still attacked as so-called “ebil not-sees” by the media. It’s partly a deliberate narrative tactic, and partly instinctive fear and hatred. Jews feel more comfortable with openly self-hating White goyim — but they need support for their colonialist enterprise, which is easier to get from right wingers. You see the same thing with Zionist Christians — jews are perfectly willing to accept their support for Israel, but absolutely hate, despise and fear the people that it comes from. Related point: mass importation of Arabs/ South Asians/ other Muslims into Europe actually tends to increase support for Israel, since it often gets framed as the “The Israelis are being attacked by these same bad brown goyim that are attacking you!” narrative when targeting the Right. See also Bibi’s response to 9/11, etc.

    Some Swedes are even brainwashed enough to swallow the in the alternative media’s commentary section popular opinion on Israel being a Christian country.

    lolwut? Never heard that one. Then again, perhaps the heresy of judeo-Christianity/ dispensationalism/ Christian Zionism never really took root in Sweden the way it did here?

  241. @geokat62

    You could say the same thing as regards Apartheid South Africa in comparison with any other conflict since then.

  242. @Pincher Martin

    The exit wound from the head shot (the kill shot) was at the lower right rear of JFK’s skull. That shot could only have come from the front. Therefore it was impossible that Oswald made the kill shot. It is easy to determine the location of the rifle shootist. Taking into account the position of the exit wound, the position of the limo, and that JFK’s chin was down when the kill shot hit, a line may be drawn between the exit wound and the muzzle of the murder weapon. That line terminates at the south end of The Triple Underpass(on top of The Triple Underpass at train track level). The rifle shootist was positioned where the guard-rail of the Underpass meets the tops of trees on The South Knoll, and such a perfect spot it is, superbly exploiting the peculiar terrain of Dealy Plaza and providing a short 20 foot walk to a concealed parking lot for a smooth getaway.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  243. S says:
    @Pincher Martin

    Oswald alone killed Kennedy. While it’s impossible to definitively rule out that someone else might’ve help Oswald in his task, he did not require it…It’s not even a difficult case. The evidence is straightforward and damning.

    While there are a few odd things about the JFK assassination which are difficult to explain (and I’ve posted on them) I’ve pretty much come to the same conclusion. Oswald was perfectly capable of having done the thing entirely by himself.

    As some others have alluded at this site, a lot of the conspiracy allegations emanated from what might be termed the radical so called ‘progressive’ left, and are reflective of their disordered and delusional minds.

    What better example is there than Mark Lane, conspiracy theorist extraordinaire?

    Lane was so grounded in reality that he thought things were hunky dory at Jonestown right up to the last minute. If it hadn’t been for his lawyer skills and talking his way out of it, Lane would likely have gotten the same treatment that fellow ‘progressive’ congressman Leo Ryan got of being shot, or, being forced to drink the kool-aid along with the rest.

    Below is a great site on the Kennedy assassination. It provides both the conspiracy accusation and the context routinely left out.

    A good example is Jack Ruby, who sure enough did say something along the lines of there being powerful people above him who were making it impossible for him to speak, and no one would ever know the truth. Then the site provides the rest if the context where Ruby also claimed (possibly in that same interview) that the Dallas Police department was murdering Jews at the jail house. It begins to make sense why Ruby’s lawyers were hoping to make a successful insanity defense.

    It’s called lying through omission and there’s a lot of that with the Kennedy assassination conspiracy theorists.

    https://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  244. @gatobart

    a) As others have mentioned, the WC Report was nothing more than a pack of lies. Many witnesses were pressured into given the testimony Commissioners wanted of them so they could build their fictional account of Oswald’s steps after the assassination.

    Completely false. The only people pressured at all during the investigation were those who gave conflicting testimony, and even those people were not pressured as much as they should have been. Marina Oswald, for example, should’ve been pressured much more than she was. She was truthful when questioned under oath, but omitted important details she later told other people.

    Chief Justice Earl Warren apologized to one of the only exceptions to the above rule. A Dallas police officer, who was on duty when Jack Ruby slipped by him and went down into the garage to kill Oswald, and who gave conflicting testimony about that day, was later threatened with perjury by one of the investigating lawyers who questioned him and felt the officer was less than truthful abut what had happened that morning. The police officer complained to his boss about the threat. Word got back around to Earl Warren. The chief justice apologized for the behavior of his staff and said that no one should be threatened by testifying.

    For example he was never ever in the bus they said in the report he took two blocks from the TSBD. The driver of that bus remembered all the passengers he had had in that particular circuit, about half a dozen, and he recalled only one young man among them who could have been Oswald.

    Oswald was given a bus transfer by the driver after the bus got caught in traffic. That transfer had the exact date stamped on it, and each bus driver had a distinctive way of marking it, and the transfer was in Oswald’s possession when he was later arrested. The distinctive marking of the driver’s markings allowed the investigators to cross-reference it with the bus driver’s log and discover the exact time Oswald was given the transfer (12:36)

    Get your facts straight, dope.

    When that particular taxi was located, the driver vaguely recognized him but he couldn’t be sure. Furthermore, his log didn’t confirm the narrative as there was no ride in it during that span of time that could be made fit the WC’s hypothesis. I think that according to the taxi log, the taxi should have been able to reach the rooming house in only six minutes, as the landlady had seen him arrive exactly at 1.0 PM. The taxi ride was reconstituted by police and it proved to be useless to confirm it anyway, they couldn’t make a car arrive in 6 minutes to the house, not even using specially adapted police cruisers.

    Rubbish.

    Why should anyone believe the landlady noted the *exact* time Oswald left or that her clock wasn’t slow/fast on that particular day. No one is that precise with such mundane details. All we know for sure is that Oswald was at his boarding house around a specific time and soon afterwards he was a few blocks away.

    Anyone trying to assign precision in the time frame to this meaningless narrative of Oswald and the boarding house is lost before they have even started. We know he was there around a particular time and the rest is conjecture. We don’t have a bus transfer. And the Dallas taxis of those days did not keep precise records when giving rides as buses did when issuing transfers.

    c) Oswald was at best a mediocre shot and nobody has ever been able to prove he could have done the shots in the way described by the WC. Many firing tests were organized later in pre-arranged settings with the participation of world class marksmen and military snipers and no one was able to reproduce what the WC attributed to him, not even using a stationary target.

    Wrong on all counts. The shots were not particularly hard once JFK’s limo cleared the trees. Oswald had been trained to use a rifle in the Marines and he therefore had better training to take those shots than probably at least 80 to 90 percent of American males. The rifle was fitted with a scope. Oswald had the weapon long enough (a few months), and had practiced target shooting with it long enough, to be accustomed to any peculiarities it had.

    Furthermore, every experts marksman who visited the TSBD along the years leaned out of the window in the 6th floor and everyone came to the same conclusion. There was no way Oswald could have done what the WC said he did from that position, let alone against a moving disappearing target.

    You’re completely full of shit. Rifle experts for both the WC and the HSCA determined that the shots taken were not that difficult. Furthermore, forensic pathologists working on both the Clark Panel (1968) and the HSCA found that the autopsy photos and X-rays confirmed that the two bullets’ trajectories came from above and behind Kennedy. The trajectories could also be calculated with some precision and they traced back to near the window on the sixth floor of the TSBD.

    And I could go on and on. But here is the evidence of the set up; the three backyard pictures of Oswald holding a rifle. They have been named A, B and C. Marina Oswald remembered having taken several pictures in April 1962 but she didn’t remember the number of them. It can be easily proven that both pictures B and C are authentic, they were actually shot in that setting, at the same time and from the same position, and that Photo A, the one were Oswald is holding the Manlicher Carcano is a fake, a fabrication. That picture was never taken there, most likely in some stage only weeks before the shooting.

    Yes, why listen to this experts who actually studied the photos and pronounced them all authentic when we have your expertise instead? Why listen to Marina who told us she took them? Why pay attention to the fact that de Morenschildt even found one photo some time later with Oswald’s (and perhaps Marina’s) writing on it.

    That is not conspiracy theory, that is physics, optics, applied to the case, in the study of the backyard pictures and anyone can do the same analysis and prove me wrong.

    You’re deep in the woods, man, and I don’t think you are ever getting home.

    • Agree: Lee
    • Replies: @gatobart
  245. @geokat62

    Do you inadvertently neglect to include Volume I, which contains the main text of the book (Volume 2 comprises only the detailed appendices referenced in the main body of the book)?

    I don’t have Volume 1. I forget the exact reason why, but at the time I was buying all these books a couple years back, I was unable to procure a copy. What I have read is Michael Collins Piper’s Final Judgment: The Missing Link in the JFK Assassination Conspiracy: Volume 2. It is a paperback “Special 2017 Commemorative Edition.” Sixth edition, second printing.

    Yes, the book is filled with appendices, but they read easily enough even if the narrative isn’t sustained or well-written. They also give a good account of how the author thinks on the topic.

    • Replies: @geokat62
    , @Ron Unz
  246. @BlackFlag

    I watched a filmed interview with the amateur. He said exactly what I related in my comment. I don’t remember his name.

    So, specifically, how are my facts quite a bit off?

    • Replies: @BlackFlag
  247. @Bombercommand

    The exit wound from the head shot (the kill shot) was at the lower right rear of JFK’s skull.

    Entirely and utterly wrong.

    We have not only the opinions of the three pathologists who performed the original autopsy, but the forensic pathologists working with autopsy photos and X-rays who participated in the Clark Panel in 1968, the Rockefeller Commission in 1975, and the HSCA in the late seventies.

    Every single one of them – even Cyril Wecht who is a supporter of the conspiracy theorists – say that the two shots which hit Kennedy came from above and behind him. Wecht speculates that it is possible that a third shot might have hit Kennedy from the side (i.e., the grassy knoll), a claim which even he admits for which there is no corroborating evidence.

    So every single one of the nearly twenty experts on four separate panels spread out over more than fifteen years, who studied either Kennedy’s body or his autopsy photos and X-rays, claims the evidence shows that Kennedy was hit from above and behind.

    Who are you to claim otherwise?

    This thing has been studied to death. You’re just unwilling to accept the hard evidence.

    • Replies: @Bombercommand
  248. @S

    Great post.

    What better example is there than Mark Lane, conspiracy theorist extraordinaire?

    As I was boning up for this topic a couple years back, the more I read about Mark Lane (and Jim Garrison) the more disgusted I became by him. He was an aggressive advocate for Oswald’s innocence before the Warren Commission investigation was even started. He lied constantly about the case. He was spectacularly dishonest. Nearly everyone who came in contact with him in this early days disliked him. The important exceptions, of course, were the audiences on college campuses, in leftist political groups, and in Europe who were already inclined to agree with his judgment about Oswald.

    The Jonestown Massacre highlighted how Lane’s judgment was widely off, but even an examination of his participation in the Kennedy investigation shows how badly flawed he was as a man.

    Thanks for the link. I’ve read McAdams’ book JFK Assassination Logic: How to Think about Claims of Conspiracy.

  249. BlackFlag says:
    @restless94110

    We discussed it earlier and someone posted a link to an interview. You can scroll up but here are the basics.
    – LAPD told him he could not have access for 20 years.
    – He claimed it 20 years later (1988) and they said it had been destroyed.
    – He filed a lawsuit in 1996. LAPD said it didn’t exist. Then they said they found it.
    – Then the courier delivering said it was stolen and it’s been lost forever.
    Quite a lot more in the interview.

    • Replies: @restless94110
  250. @Pincher Martin

    No, you are entirely and utterly, and ignorantly, wrong. You present no evidence to back your assertions, merely an Appeal To Authority fallacy. The wound in JFK’s lower right rear skull is an EXIT WOUND. Anyone with experience rifle shooting instantly recognizes it as an EXIT WOUND. Since it is an EXIT WOUND, it is impossible for the shot to have come from behind. You are so stupid, Pincher Martin, that you don’t realize that insisting that the lower right rear head wound came from behind contains it’s own negation. If the right rear head wound was an entry wound, as you insist, the bullet would exit JFK’s face roughly between his nose and mouth, a nasty mess(JFK had his chin down when the kill shot hit). So where is the damage to JFK’s face?

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
    , @Jiminy
  251. S says:
    @Franz

    Jack and Bobby were both fatalists, and clearly misunderstood the intentions of their opponents

    Speaking of which, when JFK was coming to speak at the FW Chamber of Commerce on the morning of Nov 22, at about the 6:30 point on the YouTube video of the event the TV network presenter comments the president had violated security protocols by jumping into a crowd to shake hands, just prior to his speaking. He then goes into a lengthy description of McKinley’s 1901 assassination by a member of a crowd. Of course, a few hours later Kennedy would be assassinated.

    Similarly, on the following Sunday morning, the network presenter was saying there was a growing concern someone might attempt to take Oswald’s life during the jail transfer, and that all vehicles were being checked, and every security precaution was being taken. Within about ten minutes of him saying this, exactly what he described happened.

    So, I can see where those laws came from about not even speaking hypothetically about the king’s death. To stop conspiring, but also, so as to not tempt fate.

  252. @Bombercommand

    You are a complete doofus.

    Expert testimony is *required* when studying the cause of death if one is to be taken at all seriously. The medical examiners who participated in the various Kennedy assassination inquiries were all among the best in the country. They reached that distinction only by studying thousands of dead human bodies killed in a variety of circumstances.

    So one *ought* to appeal to authority when determining the cause of death, you mindless cretin. In fact, it’s a legal requirement in all states. And if all the experts are in agreement on a particular subject, down to the last man, then who the hell are you to disagree?

    Anyone with experience rifle shooting instantly recognizes it as an EXIT WOUND.

    Well, thank God we have left the scientific practice of forensic pathology so we can hear your stories about deer hunting and how they apply to Kennedy’s assassination.

    Hey, brainiac, since the ballistic experts also agree that the bullet fragments taken from JFK’s body match the rifle found on the sixth floor of the Texas School Depository building, why don’t you explain to the audience how they ended up taking such a circuitous route from Oswald’s rifle to the front of Kennedy’s head to Kennedy’s back when Oswald’s rifle was found *behind* where Kennedy was shot.

    Please include many vivid descriptions of your adventures deer hunting while doing this.

    Magic bullet, indeed. Arlen Specter and David Belin have nothing on you.

    • Replies: @Bombercommand
  253. @BlackFlag

    So, how is that different than what I said?

    Actually, you have reminded me of those details. Since the filmed documentary I saw on YouTube in 2010 included those details.

    Thanks for reminding me of the details, They are quite a bit more detailed than my comment.

    However,they are NOT quite a bit DIFFERENT than my comment. Instead, they are simply more detailed.

    • Replies: @BlackFlag
  254. gatobart says:
    @Pincher Martin

    “Marina Oswald, for example, should’ve been pressured much more than she was”

    The words of a complete ignorant. As if Marina Oswald needed to be pressured at all! to answer her questions along the lines of what they were asking from her. She wasn’t the sharpest knife in the drawer but she had to understand that she was skating in very thin ice, just one signature away from deportation back to the USSR where she wouldn’t have been received with open arms anyway; and that without even considering what could have happened to her two kids. See…? That is what happens when a complete ignorant dabbles into subjects he doesn’t have a clue about and starts babbling with pretended authority about things he doesn’t know anything about.

    “The chief justice apologized for the behavior of his staff and said that no one should be threatened by testifying”

    and here we have once again! the words of someone who doesn’t have the slightest clue about how society works, how everyone is treated according to their social standing. Chief Justice apologizes “for having mistreated a Dallas police officer”. Question: would have done the same, Justice Warren if the injured part had been a singer/stripper at the Carrousel, a Joe Six Pack working in the TSBD, an unemployed worker…? To put the question forward is to answer it. Then again:

    “Oswald was given a bus transfer by the driver after the bus got caught in traffic. That transfer had the exact date stamped on it, and each bus driver had a distinctive way of marking it, and the transfer was in Oswald’s possession when he was later arrested”

    I said that the bus driver mistook other guy for LHO and later he recanted when the right guy got aboard his bus once again. But what can we do, a pathological liar got to keep lying. It is on record that, during one of the one or two press conferences allowed to him, or rather during the few random questions shouted at him, that Oswald accused Dallas police of having put that ticket in his pocket after his arrest. In the U.S. Criminal system an accused has the right to his day in Court when he denies the accusations made by the police and he is considered innocent until proven guilty, but of course the DPD wasn’t interested at all in giving him that chance, so “by mistake” some of their own finest left a back door unlocked, that of a police HQ that should have been at that moment the most guarded place on Earth, more than the WH or Fort Knox so when Ruby would come over he could just slip inside, as if by random coincidence.. But as I said, a pathological liar has to keep lying.

    “Why should anyone believe the landlady noted the *exact* time Oswald left or that her clock wasn’t slow/fast on that particular day”

    See, still more ignorance and stupidity from a dork who should know better than to come to a debate armed by nothing more than his absolute cluelessness. Anyone who has bothered to research the JFK assassination knows why the landlady said that Oswald had arrived exactly at 1.00 PM at the rooming house. Because he appeared at the door at the very moment when on her TV set the News of 1.00 were starting. (or some other program she used to watch which started every day at 1.00 PM) I don’t think anything else is needed to declared this individual completely unfit to carry on with a debate of the kind as He Knows Nothing About The Case.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  255. gatobart says:

    “Speaking of which, when JFK was coming to speak at the FW Chamber of Commerce on the morning of Nov 22, at about the 6:30 point on the YouTube video of the event the TV network presenter comments the president had violated security protocols by jumping into a crowd to shake hands, just prior to his speaking. He then goes into a lengthy description of McKinley’s 1901 assassination by a member of a crowd. Of course, a few hours later Kennedy would be assassinated.”

    Still more idiocy and cluelessness from a Warren Commission advocate. So JFK had been warned that it was imprudent from his part to jump into a crowd to shake hands…wait,…does this guy know how he was killed in the end. by a nearby bystander pulling a gun on him by any chance…? NO. by the gunfire from at least one rifle, according to the discredited official narrative, or most likely by at least four firing positions all over the Plaza. “Gosh, must have screamed, angry at himself, he president when already on the other side, I should have listened to them and stayed away from people …!

  256. @HbutnotG

    Well,you are,I’m sure,familiar with MK Ultra. Those boys did not fool around. Who knows what was done to SS?

    I used to read about Game,sorry to say. One character in that world was pretty interesting. A man who claimed to be a Viet Nam combat vet,an aid in a vets hospital and a master hypnotist,Major Mark Cunningham had,and I assume still has,a loyal group of followers.
    He maintained that “trance” is a normal part of our waking day,into which we go many times.
    He says that he can induce trance very easily and hypnotize just about anyone. Point being, if the deep state wants you hypnotized,you gonna get hypnotized!

    • Replies: @HbutnotG
  257. Jiminy says:
    @Bombercommand

    I noticed last time I looked at the films of the JFK killing on the Internet that there looked like a person running away from the far right just before the overpass area. Makes you wonder was the gunshot that the guy heard from down in that overpass area or did he just have good hearing, picking it from further up the road. It’s around frame 414.

  258. @Pincher Martin

    So you are know my commenting history on this subject and are aware you are vulnerable on this point, and you are. Yes, deer hunting will teach anyone what an entry wound looks like and what an exit wound looks like. Yes they look different and it is impossible to confuse an entry wound with an exit wound. Anyone who has hunted, has seen a harvested deer, or even hunting photos knows what an exit wound looks like and what an entry wound looks like and will look at the autopsy photo of the back of JFK’s head and instantly recognize an exit wound. Therefore JFK was shot from the front. The major problem with your contention that the head wound is an entry wound is that the bullet would exit through JFK’s face, and there is no damage to the face, or even an exit wound at all. How do you account for no exit wound at the front of JFK’s skull?

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  259. @Paul C.

    Yes I know. My brief comment on the WASP bringing Africans in America and their descendants having to deal with it was originally in response to some silly comment about the Kennedy as Irish negro-lovers. I didn’t mean it to be a moral judgment or a call for more “White guilt”. The Jewish part in the slave trade has been well documented. I’ll read your links, thanks.

  260. @A little boy in the crowd

    There’s a good doco, somewhere, ‘The Maltese Double-Cross’ that outlines the reality, and Megrahi’s book shows how Libya was NOT responsible. The PFLP are just one, now fairly small, fraction of the Palestinians.

  261. @Realist

    You misunderstand hubris: excessive self-confidence.

    Their self-confidence was excessive because their father, who had promoted and protected them, was incapacitated.

  262. gatobart says:

    Most researchers use to mention in their works that when the body of the already deceased President Kennedy arrived at Parkland, every single medical personnel, doctors, nurses, medical assistants , technicians, immediately recognized the small hole in his right temple as an entry wound and the fist size crater in the back of the head from which a good chunk of the brain has already escaped, as an exit wound. There was no need for any expert to come and explain them that. In fact any regular witness would have been able to come to the same conclusion as it is a simple matter of physics, not even one of medicine or physiology.

    Also, people who gathered around the stationed limousine after the president had been taken to the interior of the hospital saw a small hole piercing the windshield, there are even pictures of it, and they identified as that caused by a speeding bullet. Given the place where this bullet hole was found it was impossible that could have been fired from “Oswald’s nest” if he was firing at the vehicle,as it had to be fired from a much lower position. Prime suspects as points origin of this bullet are the second floor of the Dal Tex building and somewhere around the Triple Underpass.

    Those mere two facts, witnessed by many credible witnesses, are enough to obliterate the fiction of the official narrative, that “Oswald was a gun nut who acted alone”.

    • Thanks: ivan
    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
    , @bayviking
  263. Wielgus says:
    @Bombercommand

    In WW2, planes were known to blow up, and experimental secret weapons are dangerous. Considering the amount of explosives on the plane, it is not surprising no remains were found. It wasn’t even the only plane in the Aphrodite programme that failed, with fatalities among crew.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Aphrodite

    • Replies: @James Forrestal
  264. Chris Moore says: • Website
    @James Forrestal

    I’m claiming that until “Christians” follow the philosophy and example of Jesus and rebel against the Jewish authoritarianism, as epitomized by their imposition of the 6000 Year Old Earth club, they’re doing the bidding of the Jews, as are Muslims, as are Jew-stooge leftists, liberals, neocons…

    We need to change Zionist concepts and intellectual impositions to remove our Zionist state of mind. Until that is done, we’re all children of Jews, being pit against one another as the Big Jew pulls the strings.

    Corinthians 13:11 “When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me.”

    The 6000 Year Old Earth concept is childish.

    • Replies: @James Forrestal
  265. Ron Unz says:
    @Pincher Martin

    I was unable to procure a copy. What I have read is Michael Collins Piper’s Final Judgment: The Missing Link in the JFK Assassination Conspiracy: Volume 2.

    If you’re interested, the entire 310,000 word 2005 edition is available here in convenient HTML format:

    https://www.unz.com/book/michael_collins_piper__final-judgment/

    • Thanks: Pincher Martin
  266. @gatobart

    As if Marina Oswald needed to be pressured at all! to answer her questions along the lines of what they were asking from her. She wasn’t the sharpest knife in the drawer but she had to understand that she was skating in very thin ice, just one signature away from deportation back to the USSR where she wouldn’t have been received with open arms anyway; and that without even considering what could have happened to her two kids. See…?

    Marina Oswald was never threatened by anyone on the Warren Commission. Some of the lawyers on the commission staff wished to treat her as a hostile witness, because they felt she had been less than forthcoming in her initial testimony to the commission about the details of her life with her husband. But Warren refused their request.

    Marina felt comfortable enough with the questioning by the Warren Commission that by the time Senator Richard Russell, a commission member, went to Texas in the summer of 1964 to question her on his own, she didn’t even bring her lawyer along. By that time, she was so accustomed to questioning that she was no longer deferential and apologetic, as she had been during her first testimony. When Russell tried to lead her to a conclusion he wanted, she contradicted him.

    The irony is that that the only person who threatened to send Marina and her kids back to Russia in either 1963 or 1964 was her husband, Lee Harvey Oswald. He made her write to the Soviet Embassy about returning to the USSR. She did it only under duress.

    and here we have once again! the words of someone who doesn’t have the slightest clue about how society works, how everyone is treated according to their social standing. Chief Justice apologizes “for having mistreated a Dallas police officer”. Question: would have done the same, Justice Warren if the injured part had been a singer/stripper at the Carrousel, a Joe Six Pack working in the TSBD, an unemployed worker…?

    Warren did the same thing for Marina Oswald, a person who was of no consequence to anyone. As I just explained to you, even as his staff insisted that Marina Oswald was not being forthcoming in her testimony, he refused to allow them to treat her as a hostile witness. In fact, several of those lawyers felt Warren treated Marina like a grandchild.

    But lots of laughs at you trying to argue that Earl Warren – the chief justice best known for his constitutional decisions advancing civil rights, including the rights of the arrested and the accused that handicapped both the police in their ability to make arrests and prosecutors in their ability to get guilty pleas – was standing up for Dallas police officers because of their “social standing.” That’s pretty funny.

    I said that the bus driver mistook other guy for LHO and later he recanted when the right guy got aboard his bus once again. But what can we do, a pathological liar got to keep lying. It is on record that, during one of the one or two press conferences allowed to him, or rather during the few random questions shouted at him, that Oswald accused Dallas police of having put that ticket in his pocket after his arrest.

    You’re such a dummy. First of all, the bus driver’s testimony is hardly crucial. Mary Bledsoe, a former landlady of Oswald’s, was on that bus, too, and she recognized Oswald when he got on the bus and also saw him get off it when the bus soon stalled in traffic.

    BTW, did the Dallas police officers also get the bus driver to make his distinctive mark on the ticket, too? Did they get the driver’s log to make note of the time when the transfer was issued?

    And all in time to make an arrest of Oswald about an hour later.

    The bus driver, Cecil McWatters, was brought in police headquarters that day to confirm that he issued the transfer. He saw that the transfer had his distinctive crescent-shaped mark on it and even recalled exactly where he issued it, since he had made out only two transfers that day. He was “absolutely positive” he issued that transfer.

    I can find no record of Oswald publicly disputing the bus transfer. You’re probably lying again.

    See, still more ignorance and stupidity from a dork who should know better than to come to a debate armed by nothing more than his absolute cluelessness. Anyone who has bothered to research the JFK assassination knows why the landlady said that Oswald had arrived exactly at 1.00 PM at the rooming house. Because he appeared at the door at the very moment when on her TV set the News of 1.00 were starting. (or some other program she used to watch which started every day at 1.00 PM) I don’t think anything else is needed to declared this individual completely unfit to carry on with a debate of the kind as He Knows Nothing About The Case.

    Lots of laughs.

    Hey, genius, can you think of anything that might have happened on November 22nd, 1963, that would’ve pre-empted the normal TV programming on all the channels for that day? I’m drawing a blank here, but maybe you can help me out.

    As for rooming house manager Earlene Roberts’ testimony, she says she was playing with the rabbit ears on her TV when Oswald walked in, not watching a particular program. She told the WC that Oswald came back to the boarding house “around one o’clock.” Not exactly at one o’clock, as you earlier tried to claim. In fact, the best estimates suggest Oswald left the boarding house a minute *before* one o’clock, giving him twelve minutes to cover an eighth of a mile.

  267. @Bombercommand

    I did not read your posting history. I took a guess that you were a deer hunter. As usual, my guesses are more accurate than your facts.

    Yes, deer hunting will teach anyone what an entry wound looks like and what an exit wound looks like.

    No, it will not. Forensic pathologists divine the direction of a wound by studying the beveling trauma to the skeletal structure. They don’t just eyeball the corpse like some amateur hunter.

    A deer hunter has no reason to study the wounds on his prey to that degree. On average, a good medical examiner spends two to three hours studying a corpse. They don’t walk into a room and say, “Please note nurse, that this wound looks very smiler to the eight-point buck I shot last summer.”

  268. @gatobart

    Gatobart is lying again.

    Most researchers use to mention in their works that when the body of the already deceased President Kennedy arrived at Parkland, every single medical personnel, doctors, nurses, medical assistants , technicians, immediately recognized the small hole in his right temple as an entry wound and the fist size crater in the back of the head from which a good chunk of the brain has already escaped, as an exit wound.

    That’s simply not true. There were around twenty medical people in the Parkland Trauma Room One that day trying to save Kennedy’s life. Is it Gatobart’s contention that *all of them* later testified that the wound to the front was an entrance wound? Is so, he’s lying, plain and simple.

    The four main Parkland hospital doctors who attended to Kennedy’s wounds that day (Charles Carrico, Malcolm Perry, Marion Jenkins, & Charles Baxter) all agreed in 1992 that “nothing we observed that day contradicts the autopsy findings that the bullets were fired from above and behind by a high-velocity bullet.”

    What’s more, the men in Parkland Trauma Room One were all young and inexperienced doctors. The more experienced Parkland doctors were in Galveston at a conference that day. These young doctors had only twenty minutes with Kennedy’s body before he was pronounced dead, twenty minutes they desperately spent trying to save his life. They had no time to examine the body. They never even bothered to turn his body over. They were not trained as forensic pathologists. Nor was determining the cause of death their task at that moment.

    The only Parkland doctors who were in Trauma Room One that day and who have strong and consistent conspiracy-minded views about Kennedy’s wounds are Robert McClelland and Charles Crenshaw.

    McClelland admits he is not a pathologist and has never conducted an autopsy, but still believes that wound he saw on Kennedy’s head that day is consistent with a shot from the grassy knoll. But he also admits to several mistakes in his analysis over the years.

    Meanwhile, Crenshaw was a junior resident and not one of the lead doctors in the effort to save Kennedy’s life. McClelland and Crenshaw’s accounts contradict each other’s, with McClelland stating that by the time he and Crenshaw arrived in Trauma Room One, Dr Perry has already made the tracheotomy on Kennedy’s throat wound. That does not support Crenshaw’s account. Crenshaw also had no training or background as a pathologist. When Dr Perry heard about some of Crenshaw’s claims, he considered a lawsuit against him.

  269. Sparkon says:
    @Pincher Martin

    You’ve already demonstrated many times in our previous debate that your noggin is impenetrable by either facts or logic. You’re encased in a barnacle of dogma attached to a stonewall that says Oswald killed Pres. Kennedy. Now you’ve got a poor memory, to boot, and sure, you’d like to forget.

    But as I’ve already explained to you, the first shot to hit Pres. Kennedy struck him in the throat after penetrating the windshield of his limousine. That shot was fired from a position in front of the motorcade in an area in or near the south knoll parking lot.

    Oswald couldn’t have fired that shot, and Oswald didn’t kill or even shoot at President Kennedy.

    At Parkland Hospital, attending doctor Malcom Perry described the wound as “an entrance wound in the front of the throat.”

    Of course it won’t do you any good at all to read that book Unz is recommending. If you can’t remember the substance of our past discussion here less than six months ago, when you were furiously insisting this and that, why should anyone think you can even remember what you’ve read, and why should anyone even pay you any heed at all?

    You can pick up the discussion and exchange between us in my previous comment here:

    https://www.unz.com/article/remember-the-kennedys/?showcomments#comment-4359473

    In that previous comment thread, your name appears 631 times, while my handle generates just 31 matches. Your technique was to swamp the discussion with walls of text, much of cut ‘n’ paste from Bugliosi.

    You’re indefatigable in your mendacity; that much I’ll give you.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  270. bayviking says:
    @RationalandLogical

    I cannot bear to listen to a three hour presentation, though I have read David Lifton’s “Best Evidence” which attempts to prove that agents within our Government deliberately doctored evidence to hide an assassination conspiracy. There was and is an ongoing conspiracy cover-up details of that conspiracy. But it had little or nothing to do with the contradictory evidence between the abruptly halted initiation of a autopsy in Dallas and its completion in Bethesda. A tracheotomy was performed in Dallas which obscured a bullet hole. With such severe damage to his head, the efforts in Dallas to save JFK’s life would seem absurd in retrospect. Parts of JFK’s skull trickled in at Dallas and Bethesda and were replaced changing the appearance. The magic bullet theory put forth by the Warren Commission is ridiculous and Connolly never believed it. There is little doubt the fatal shot came from the front. Whether anybody present at one or both of those procedures was aware or involved in the conspiracy cannot be determined with any certainty. But neither should we impute malice to efforts to save JFK’s life or ineffective efforts to make his appearance more presentable in a casket. JFK’s remains should be exhumed and analyzed carefully to determine for once and for all the path of all bullets that wwere fired that day. That they came from more than one direction would proof irrefutably that there was and is a conspiracy to murder JFK and cover the crime up. This is a murder case and bodies are exhumed all the time to solve them. This should not be n exception.

  271. I always knew that Sirhan Sirhan was a patsy. That’s how it is in virtually every high profile assassination. It’s their MO because, as you can see, it works. With the ubiquitous media pushing it down your throat 24/7, it’s pure mind control.

  272. @Pheasant

    Yeah, yeah, yeah. Surprised you didn’t bring up the just-so story about how 22 lr bullets richochet against the interior of the skull. The reality is that had John Hinckley used a 9mm, Reagan and Brady (at minimum) would have been dead.

    22 lr are good for easy kills–that’s why trappers carry them, and they might have advantages against humans in a controlled environment–if you stalk someone, or have them tied up. But out in the open where you have 5 seconds to shoot? No way.

    • Replies: @Pheasant
  273. Alden says:
    @Commentator Mike

    Impossible to believe that anyone shooting from a few feet away could miss a medium sized man. As for the wounds in the side or back of Kennedy’s neck celebrities surrounded by well wishers congratulating them are constantly moving their heads around to look at the people around them.

    Thane Cesar had a gun and was there. Sirhan had an obvious often expressed motive, was there, had a gun and shot it.

    Facts.

    Other than being hired by the CIA, Mossad or other bogeymen and paid to kill Kennedy Thane Cesar had no motive. And not one person has found any evidence that Thane Cesar was paid or benefited in any way from Kennedy’s killing.

    What reasonable man would murder a very popular presidential candidate in a room full of witnesses? For no payment or benefit?

  274. Alden says:
    @Anonymous

    Kennedy being so celebrated by the press would have announced the location of the election night party.

    According to his biographies Sirhan learned the location of the election night party from a local newspaper the day before the election.

    Aren’t you an American? Ever been even slightly involved in a political campaign? Maybe you’re not aware but there’s always a party election night. In 1968 more than today because in 1968 campaigns used volunteers more than now when the effort is TV ads.

  275. Alden says:
    @Sirius

    I have that book. Given the way jews hide behind fronts like Martin Luther John Calvin Thomas Cromwell and his gr gr nephew Oliver, and since 1910 American blacks, I believe Abu Nidal was an Israeli operative.

  276. @Sparkon

    You’ve already demonstrated many times in our previous debate that your noggin is impenetrable by either facts or logic. You’re encased in a barnacle of dogma attached to a stonewall that says Oswald killed Pres. Kennedy. Now you’ve got a poor memory, to boot, and sure, you’d like to forget.

    There’s nothing for me to remember. You were a minor player in that debate.

    I just went back and looked at the thread. You were not even among the top ten commentators who engaged with me.

    I commented 215 times in that thread. Ron Unz was my top respondent with 26 direct replies. James Kennett was next with 22. Iris had 18. Alden had 14. Skeptical was next with 12. Dimples had 11 responses to my posts. Lysias and Laurent Guyenot had 10 apiece.

    I’m counting only direct replies. Not indirect comments made about my posts.

    You had *three* direct responses to my posts and a couple of indirect responses.

    Why the hell would you think I would remember such a measly contribution when I was much more engaged with around a dozen other posters?

    But as I’ve already explained to you, the first shot to hit Pres. Kennedy struck him in the throat after penetrating the windshield of his limousine. That shot was fired from a position in front of the motorcade in an area in or near the south knoll parking lot.

    And as I told you six months ago, you are wrong. No evidence supports this. Dr Perry, who performed the tracheotomy to Kennedy’s throat wound, said in 1992 that nothing he saw that day in Trauma Room One contradicts the autopsy findings.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  277. @Chris Moore

    So you’re just another ignorant, hate-filled Barbary Slave State denialist.

    Got it.

  278. gatobart says:

    I already said that i won’t respond anymore to the comments by a certain individual here because not only of his abyssal ignorance about the JFK case but also for his great intellectual dishonesty. I have argued with “Saddam Had WMDs” loons, with 911 “OBL did it” dingbats and with “We Went to the Moon” idiots and I swear, I have never found in any of them the Jupiter size dishonesty, as the ignorance, of WCR lovers, and this guy takes the cake at that. One element of proof:

    “Why should anyone believe the landlady noted the *exact* time Oswald left or that her clock wasn’t slow/fast on that particular day. No one is that precise with such mundane details. All we know for sure is that Oswald was at his boarding house around a specific time and soon afterwards he was a few blocks away”

    Really, it is inconceivable that someone sporting that kind of abyssal ignorance about the case would have the gall to come to threads like this one, even more when he is pretending to be the highest authority in the land. What he says in this little text amounts to say that the testimony of DVD officer Marrion Davis about his encounter with Lee Harvey Oswald in the cafeteria of the second floor of the TSBD doesn’t really matter. That the exact time that this encounter took place is irrelevant, that it could have taken place 90 seconds after the shooting or ten minutes after and that won’t make any difference concerning where Oswald was during the event. That deep level of ignorance (even if in this case I suspect it may be simply because of intellectual dishonesty, that of a paid troll) After all, someone already has suggested that this individual may be here in assignment.

    The testimony of Mrs. Roberts, LHO’s landlady, specially concerning the exact time when he arrived to her rooming house, is not in any way “a mundane detail” for the simple reason that establishes a secure, indisputable moment in his timeline after Plaza Dealey, by which we can be sure 100% he was at a certain place. It is a solid anchor in time, just like the meeting at past 12:31 in the TSBD cafeteria. Only a clueless idiot could disregard that, if he knows the first thing about the case. And to know where LHO was exactly at 1.00 PM was essential, as this mere piece of info could have made or broken the case for the prosecution as, I think that the Dallas D.A. himself was the one who said it, the Tippit killing was the Rosetta Stone to solve the assassination of the President. If they could prove that Oswald killed Tippit then the proof would be made that he killed Kennedy. He put it in those exact words. (I don’t agree with it but that is how authorities saw the case in the hours after the shooting and how pro-WCR people and even skeptics see it to this day) That is how important Mrs. Roberts’ testimony was: because had Oswald had the chance to have his day in court she, her time estimate, could have saved him, could have made him a free man. Mrs. Roberts said that Oswald arrived and went to his room and then a few minutes later he went out again and a little later she looket out in the window and saw him standing in the nearest bus stop, where the bus would come going in the opposite direction related to the spot where Tippit was killed. Which mean Oswald was still around the rooming house at about 1.05 PM.

    Now, according to witnesses, officer Tippit was murdered around 01:15-01:16 PM. One even said he had checked his wristwatch when it happened. That makes for a time of at most 10 minutes between the moment he was last seen and when Tippit was killed. The distance between both place according to those who know, is about a mile, one that LHO couldn’t have made by simply walking, even more considering that he was last seen apparently waiting a bus going in the opposite direction and also that when he was presumably stopped by Tippit he was walking Towards the rooming house, not away from it. So at the end the debate about LOH’s guilt or innocence concerning the Tippit’s killing came to rest on that single point: how could have he possibly gone from point A (rooming house) to B (Tippit CS) if he couldn’t have walked to it…? The most likely possibility is that he was picked up by some vehicle while on that bus stop (the Rambler Roger Craig said he saw picking him up in Plaza Dealey…?) or even spookier, the same police cruiser Mrs. Roberst saw stopping by the house while Oswald was in his room and which tooted its horn several time, like hurrying up someone inside…? In any case Oswald didn’t seem to be at all completely alone during that time, and maybe even there was more than one police car lurking around or near him at the time. A lady who lived right in front of the spot where Tippit was killed saw the shooting from the second floor of her house and also saw something else: a second police cruiser that was parked in the alley just a few meters away, that had been there for some time, like in ambush, and from which a police officer came out after Tippit was shot, came walking to him to inspect the body, then went back to his car and slowly backed up the same alley. There are a lot of strange elements in this Tippit killing, like the fact that he was ordered by his dispatcher to go to the Oak Cliff neighborhood at around 12:45 Pm. (Why..?) Until that moment he (the only man of the police forces not to be called to PD) was in the parking station of a service station overlooking the Dallas-Oak Cliff highway and that call had to come in the few minutes after Craig said he had seen the Rambler picking up LHO in Plaza Dealey. If we trust Craig and those many witnesses who saw him in the service station, maybe, just maybe he was waiting for the Rambler to pass by to get in its tail. Who knows.

    Anyway, see, why there is no reason to waste time with a loser who is either complete ignorant on the case or who is working on assignment?

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  279. bayviking says:
    @SunBakedSuburb

    Siran Siran’s deafening silence can be attributed to his brothers connections to Roselli. Shut up, or they die too. Even Roselli was found in a 55 gallon drum after being asked to testify about the JFK assassination, along with nine others that died prematurely when asked to testify. Trafficante must have been responsible for killing Roselli and Marchello.

    Its doubtful the CIA had a direct involvement. More likely their chosen hit men for Castro were turned on JFK instead. The endless cover-us which followed are as much about preserving the careers of Helms and Hoover, as the reputation of the CIA. Helms was planning two hits using the mob, which the Kennedy’s were prosecuting and would never have approved had they known. Guaranteed they would have fired Helms. They were already planning on firing Hoover, the man who hated King more than anyone else in the country.

    • Replies: @gatobart
    , @gatobart
  280. bayviking says:
    @gatobart

    Its my understanding, from what I’ve read, that the Presidential Lincoln windshield bullet hole you are referring to disappeared in one day.

    • Replies: @gatobart
  281. gatobart says:
    @bayviking

    You are right. One of the witnesses at Parkland declared that the DPD agent who was guarding the Lincoln became rather pizzed off hearing the comments of the people and started babbling that it was a only a scratch and he then told everyone to scram. And then they took the car away and fixed the windshield in no time.

    As the bullet scratch on the concrete sidewalk on Elm Street also. The trace of the ricochet of a bullet with direction pointed exactly to the sixth floor of the TSBD, but wait for it, to the window on the opposite side of that of “Oswald’s nest”. The very efficient Dallas City repaired the pavement in no time after the facts.

  282. Alden says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    So many conspiracy people seem to believe that that night, surrounded by people congratulating him Kennedy would have kept his head, neck and upper torso stiff. He wouldn’t his head and neck would have been in constant motion.

    Think of 8th grade high school graduation weddings new babies relatives crowding around. Amateur ball games someone bats pitches shoots into the hoop winner is congratulated by teammates and spectators . Bartenders and waiters with customers trying to get their attention. People in those situations move their heads to contact as many people as possible

    The coroner claimed the death bullet was just under his ear. That’s the side of his head, not the back.

    As for Sirhan’s motive. There are several biographies of him. He had the best motive in the world to shoot a pro Israeli military American politician. Kennedy may have been anti AIPAC in 196o. By 1968 he was totally pro Israel as every American politician had to be at that time.

    The public libraries are closed but I’m sure it’s possible to find one of the Sirhan biographies I read on amazon B&N Abe books thrift books Sirhan didn’t need to be hypnotized to hate Israel and its supporters. He had excellent reason to hate Israel and its supporters.

  283. Alden says:
    @Ron Unz

    The fatal bullet was just behind his ear. And as a triumphant politician surrounded by well wishers he would have constantly turned his head to acknowledge well wishers. You ran the English immersion and your Senate campaigns. You know how it is.

    At that point in his life, Kennedy was as much a puppet of AIPAC and Israel as Johnson, Nixon and all their successors.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  284. gatobart says:
    @bayviking

    Its doubtful the CIA had a direct involvement.

    I tend to agree. I find it hard to believe that this was a big scale U.S. government conspiracy, with the participation of practically everyone, Pentagon, CIA, FBI, you name it. I am more inclined to think it was more the work of a group of assorted individuals in every possible field: military or ex-military, extreme right wingers, anti-Castro Cubans, rogue elements within the CIA. The mob probably being the only one being as a whole for it. It is hard to believe that the government itself could have gone through the trouble of doing all this with the added burden of having to fake the entire investigation, with the possible nasty result we are seeing to this day, when all they had to do was to recruit a single SS agent to put a pill in Kennedy’s coffee. Given his delicate state of health it wouldn’t have taken a too strong a pill to get the same result with no problem. Just remember what happened to Jean Paul 1 after the new Pope came up with novel ideas about completely changing the Church to adapt to the realities of the XX Century, the Great Church Reformer. Gone in 30 days and no one is talking about it. On the other side the JFK assassination is much compared to the attempt on the life of General de Gaulle in 1962, in a similar ambush in France, by the OAS. These were desperate people who had no way to get near De Gaulle other than mounting an ambush against him. Chileans may recall also the assassination attempt against Pinochet in 1985, by a clandestine guerrilla group. Ambushes like this one seem to be the norm for desperate people, people who want to get at a powerful leader and have no possibility of getting anywhere near him. But i am not discarding anything. After all, if powerful people in government, in the military, had arrived to the conclusion Kennedy had committed high treason for any reason, they may have concluded he deserved public execution by firing squad, who knows. But the main argument against big government conspiracy to murder Kennedy has always been to me the lack of a clear and strong motive and why they had to use that desperate way, when they had many easier ways to get him. Even sexual scandals.

    • Replies: @Patrick McNally
  285. @gatobart

    I don’t mind you ducking out the back door to avoid me embarrassing you, but you could do so with more dignity.

    What he says in this little text amounts to say that the testimony of DVD officer Marrion Davis about his encounter with Lee Harvey Oswald in the cafeteria of the second floor of the TSBD doesn’t really matter. That the exact time that this encounter took place is irrelevant, that it could have taken place 90 seconds after the shooting or ten minutes after and that won’t make any difference concerning where Oswald was during the event.

    I did not say the “exact time” was “irrelevant.” I said precision is impossible in this case, and I made fun of you for pretending that some housekeeper/manager kept a precise record of Oswald’s comings and goings at her boarding house that day based on her regular television viewing habits.

    She never made that claim. She said Oswald returned “around 1:00.” Even if she had made such a claim, it would’ve been false that day as her regular TV programming would’ve been pre-empted because of the assassination. Walter Cronkite first went on the air at CBS with the news of JFK’s shooting at 12:40 PM that day, interrupting a soap opera. The other networks soon followed. NBC went on air at 12:45 PM and ABC at approximately 12:50.

    So when Oswald returned to the boarding house “around 1:00,” the only thing the housekeeper could’ve possibly been watching on TV was a commercial-free special news broadcast on the shooting. That kind of broadcast would’ve given her no indication of the precise time, as there were no commercial breaks or programming starts.

    That is how important Mrs. Roberts’ testimony was: because had Oswald had the chance to have his day in court she, her time estimate, could have saved him, could have made him a free man.

    Nothing was going to save Oswald. His goose was cooked. As Earl Warren and many other lawyers who have studied the case have pointed out, the case for Oswald shooting Kennedy was open and shut. It would’ve been an easy case to try, and no jury was going to acquit him with the evidence available at the TSDB and the Paines’ home.

    But as easy as was the case for proving Oswald shot the President, the case for Oswald shooting office Tippit was even more of a slam dunk. One DA said he had never seen such an easy case in all his twenty years of prosecuting them. There was a wealth of witnesses (nearly ten), physical evidence, and Oswald’s proximity to the scene when he was captured with the murder weapon on him.

    You need to learn how to prevaricate with more skill.

  286. gatobart says:

    As for Sirhan’s motive. There are several biographies of him.

    For all this contribution is worth. I once heard somewhere, I think that was one of Art Bell’s guest when he was alive and doing his Coast To Coast AM program, that this is something Sirhan had to do or else. This Art Bell guest said that the man had accumulated a big gambling debt with the Chicago mob, one he couldn’t possibly pay, and he had been giving the choice of going to LA and play the fall guy in some assassination (even if he may have not been told the real target) or suffering the usual ice-pick-in-the-ear mob treatment. And of course he knew what was best for him. Heard in Art Bell’s CTCAM.

  287. @Patrick McNally

    It was JFK who became embroiled in a fight with the Israel lobby over both Dimona and “AIPAC”.

    Fact check: FALSE

    JFK took the lead on Dimona, of course, but it was the DOJ that ordered the American Zionist Council* to comply with the Foreign Agents Registration Act. The DOJ is directed by the Attorney General. And who was the Attorney General under JFK again? That’s right — RFK.

    11/21/62: Assistant Attorney General and Director of the Internal Security Division J. Walter Yeagley — with RFK’s approval — sends a letter to the AZC notifying them that they’re required to register under FARA, just like all other foreign lobbies: “…receipt of such funds from the American Section of the Jewish Agency for Israel constitutes the Council an agent of a foreign principal…the Council’s registration is requested.”

    The AZC stalls, agitates, pulls strings, drags things out until October of 1963:

    10/17/63: J. Walter Yeagley notes of DOJ AZC meeting. “Judge Rifkind [lead counsel for the AZC] then made a plea for no registration, stating it was the opinion of most of the persons affiliated with the Council that such registration would be so publicized by the American Council on Judaism that it would eventually destroy the Zionist movement…he did not believe his clients would file any papers or sign any papers indicating that the organization was an agent of a foreign principal. I told him that any such information or material that is supplied on that basis would be made part of the Department’s public files available for inspection by the public…”

    11/22/63 JFL assassinated

    LBJ takes over, RFK is now essentially a lame duck as AG, the AZC case drags out further, Katzenbach takes over as AG in September ’64, drops the whole thing, the AZC transfers its functions to a new brand — AIPAC — which continues to coordinate Israeli malign foreign influence activities in the US to this day.

    *Not AIPAC — it’s not clear whether that’s an error, or simply dishonesty, on your part. The AZC was AIPAC’s predecessor as an Israeli foreign malign influence operation for meddling in US elections. AIPAC wasn’t formed until 1963 — after the DOJ started to push the AZC to register as a foreign lobby.

    • Replies: @Patrick McNally
  288. Ron Unz says:
    @Alden

    The fatal bullet was just behind his ear. And as a triumphant politician surrounded by well wishers he would have constantly turned his head to acknowledge well wishers.

    According to the official coroner’s report, the fatal shot was fired at a distance of a couple of inches and there were powder burns on RFK’s right ear. Meanwhile, all witnesses agree that Sirhan was standing several feet in front of RFK. You have a law enforcement background. Isn’t that open-and-shut physical evidence?

    A tape uncovered in 2004 revealed that at least a dozen shots had been fired, some of them almost simultaneously. Sirhan’s gun held only eight rounds and he never had a chance to reload. More open-and-shut physical evidence of a second gunman?

    I think I may understand your stubbornness in the face of this seemingly overwhelming physical evidence.

    Until just a few years ago, I’d never paid the slightest attention to the Kennedy assassinations, always vaguely assuming that there was no significant evidence of any conspiracy. Therefore, I entered the topic with a completely open mind, looked at the facts, and concluded—Oops!—I’d been completely mistaken and there had obviously been a conspiracy.

    Meanwhile, you were a young adult at the time of the RFK assassination, and deeply despised the views of all the liberals who had supported the Kennedys and probably constituted 95% of the conspiracy-believers, from Mark Lane on down. So you were naturally inclined to take the other side. Moreover, the strong evidence of an RFK conspiracy only came out many years or decades later, long after you had stopped paying attention to the topic.

    Also, you have investigated and convinced yourself of the reality of many, many other “conspiracy theories” regarding various important events of the last couple of centuries. Therefore, you find it difficult to admit you may have been completely mistaken for over fifty years about the biggest “conspiracy” of the second half of the twentieth century, regarding an event which you yourself had lived through.

    • Replies: @David In TN
  289. @gatobart

    Janes Jesus Angleton was the connecting thread through it all. He headed CIA counter-intelligence and was very close to Mossad, acting as the fundamental tie between Mossad and CIA. All evidence about a CIA link to the JFK assassination is really evidence of an Angleton-link which in turn is really evidence of a Mossad-link.

    It’s a bit different (though closely related) if one goes from the JFK to RFK case. With JFK the motive was simply that he pushing hard in his administration to get control over Dimona and AIPAC. Preventing the spread of WMDs into the Middle East and having appropriate agencies registered as in the employ of a foreign government. RFK was not running any such campaign in 1968. He only represented a threat insofar as he certainly wished to probe into the murder of his brother. That could not be allowed. Other than that, he had no ongoing conflict with the Israel lobby in 1968.

    An interesting point of speculation, which perhaps can never be answered, is to what extent were other parties implicitly drawn into the 1968 assassination? With the 1963 killing the evidence clearly points towards Israel. But the whole thing was done in a way which cast many incriminations about and helped the cover-up. People were in a panic that it might somehow be exposed that Castro, the KGB, some hidden fascist network in the US military, the Chicago mob, et cetera would any of them be incriminated. A lot of people probably participated in partial cover-ups after 1963 just because it seemed safer, not because they were ever really part of a conspiracy. That may have also influenced things in 1968. Were some people drawn into helping an assassination in 1968 because they feared exposing past cover-ups, but without really knowing what the original assassination in 1963 was about? That at least is plausible.

    • Replies: @bayviking
    , @gatobart
  290. gatobart says:
    @bayviking

    Sorry, I mistakenly took your quote about the Robert Kennedy assassination to head a post I wrote about that of his brother.

  291. bayviking says:
    @Patrick McNally

    Angleton was very sympathetic and complicit with Israel and Mossad. He was one of a handful of CIA agents with direct knowledge of this assassination spree which Robert would have most certainly reopened.

    The Kennedy brothers were pursuing the mob and Jimmy Hoffa with a vengeance. But, for JFK, halting nuclear weapon proliferation was a highest priority. JFK’s death made it easier for Israel to build a bomb which they did. But, the mob fought back and confessed, Marcello in a wiretap on his prison cell, Roselli and Traficante to their lawyers which was revealed only after their death. I have purchased “Final Judgement” but have yet to see any direct connection between Mossad and JFK’s assassination.

    • Replies: @Patrick McNally
  292. BlackFlag says:
    @restless94110

    Yes, no big deal. Mostly more detail and there is a lot more detail than that in the interview that indicates malfeasance. But also that he didn’t get any of the film back and that the LAPD gave him the runaround for 28 years (your post implied fewer) and finally had it conveniently stolen from the courier who was on his way to deliver it:

    He was robbed just out of LAPD jurisdiction out there by the airport and this poor courier was sitting in his car and all the sudden some guy slashes the tires of his car, he pulls over, they reach in the back and they steal the briefcase with the film and the evidence in it and this guy shows up in court with nothing.

    • Replies: @restless94110
  293. @bayviking

    A long-running argument made multiple times by repeated authors around the Dallas-assassination has been that while, yes, JFK had pissed off the Chicago mob who had helped steal the 1960 election from Nixon and were then rewarding with something other than they had expected when the Kennedy brothers began prosecuting, but nonetheless there were allegedly other elements tied to the CIA which played an essential role in making the assassination possible. I won’t try to rehash all of those arguments here. Suffice it to say that Michael Collins Piper in Final Judgment does indeed recognize that the Chicago mob all by itself would have an incentive to want to do away with JFK. It really comes down to the issue of do you believe that they were big enough to handle everything by themselves. Most authors have rejected that proposition and insist that something larger must have been involved, but that’s for you to decide.

    In the context of attempting to account for a higher motive behind the Dallas-assassination a swirl of often contradictory claims have been made by various authors. One very popular such claim is based upon NSAM 263. This was where Robert McNamara and Maxwell Taylor recommended to JFK that changes in the Diem government in Saigon should be made and a withdrawal of US personnel initiated. After Diem himself had been assassinated it occurred that NSAM 273 was now put forward by the same people who had offered NSAM 263 earlier. There wasn’t too much of a difference between the 2 documents, but this has been one of the most popular go-to arguments among JFK-conspiracy enthusiasts: the claim that JFK had radical plans to order a total withdrawal from Vietnam and that the Dallas-murder was a plot by Cold War hardliners to stop this.

    The latter argument has always been very weak. The actual document NSAM 263 does not portray JFK as insisting on a rapid withdrawal but simply shows McNamara and Taylor, 2 individuals who were quite prominent in LBJ’s later escalation in Vietnam, as suggesting a withdrawal of troops. It’s clear that their suggestion was tied in with dissatisfaction with Diem, who was assassinated before JFK himself. There’s no real reason to deduce from NSAMs 263 & 273 that JFK was about to launch a major peace initiative. People obsessed with that thesis have been searching rather for an explanation of why would some elements from the CIA have wanted to facilitate the Dallas-assassination? But their argument is really driven by the sense that the Chicago mob wasn’t big enough to pull all of the strings needed for Dallas to happen.

    If one focuses instead on Angleton, his role in the CIA, his connections to Israel, and Kennedy’s conflicts with the same, then for the first time one has a coherent explanation which allows all of the strings to be pulled together. The majority of JFK-conspiratology for the first few decades was cranked out by liberal peaceniks of the 1960s who relished the thought that JFK was coming around to their side. Because there were some real debates even among known Vietnam-interventionists such as McNamara & Taylor (who proposed NSAM 263 but were part of the later war) this argument can have a superficial credibility. But the Israel-model put forward by Piper is clearly superior in explanatory coherence.

    • Replies: @bayviking
  294. @James Forrestal

    Nothing which you’ve said there really contradicts much of what I had said, but does flush it out better. Yes, I was using both “JFK” and “AIPAC” as general heuristic terms here. You are correct about both RFK’s role in the earlier investigations and about the name-change which led to “AIPAC.” However the point about RFK is simply that by 1968 he was no longer involved in pushing for investigations of what was now called “AIPAC.” The motive for bumping him off in 1968 would simply have been that he wanted to carry forward investigation into his brother’s killing. Beyond that, he wasn’t actually doing anything in 1968 that would have upset any important people.

    • Replies: @James Forrestal
  295. @Pincher Martin

    “Oswald killed Kennedy.

    It’s not even a difficult case. The evidence is straightforward and damning.”

    Your comments, in my opinion, are not even worth replying to. But I will waste my time by mentioning a few things. MANY highly educated people disagree with you. Among the are Cyril Wecht, M.D., J.D.; Mark Lane (deceased); Dorothy Kilgallen (deceased); Roger D. Craig (deceased) and many, many more.

    Spreadsheet of untimely / mysterious deaths of people connected to the JFK assassination (murder) –

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1FmXudDf6pqisxq_mepIC6iuG47RkDskPDWzQ9L7Lykw/edit#gid=1

    Brad Anbro (my real name)

    • Replies: @gatobart
    , @Pincher Martin
  296. Wielgus says:
    @geokat62


    From Lethal Weapon II (1989). Try to imagine a Hollywood film that depicted Israelis like this…
    TV shows and perhaps films in the Muslim world certainly do have Israeli villains, though.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  297. Sparkon says:
    @Pincher Martin

    No, as I said, not even a million words can make the hole in the windshield and the entrance wound in JFK’s throat go away.

    You mistake quantity for quality.

    You’re wrong.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
    , @ivan
  298. gatobart says:
    @Brad Anbro

    “Your comments, in my opinion, are not even worth replying to”

    Correction: They are not worth even wasting one’s time readying them. It is what I do since at least a couple of days.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  299. @Brad Anbro

    Your post, in my opinion, is not worth replying to, but I will lower myself to answer it anyway.

    Your spreadsheet is beyond silly.

    J. Edgar Hoover? Ken O’Donnell? Clyde Tolson? LBJ? None of those deaths are untimely/mysterious.

    Why not just list everyone who died after November 22nd, 1963 and be done with it?

    And Dorothy Kilgallen and Roger D Craig were “highly educated”?

    – Pincher Martin (NOT my real name)

  300. @gatobart

    It is what I do since at least a couple of days.

    You mean, it’s what you’ve done since I caught you lying. Care to repeat your false claim that “every single medical personnel, doctors, nurses, medical assistants , technicians, immediately recognized the small hole in his right temple as an entry wound and the fist size crater in the back of the head from which a good chunk of the brain has already escaped, as an exit wound.”

  301. @Sparkon

    No, as I said, not even a million words can make the hole in the windshield and the entrance wound in JFK’s throat go away.

    They were never there in the first place.

    In eight words, I have made them go away.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  302. @Ron Unz

    Ron,

    I asked you this a few years ago and will again. If “they” wanted to get rid of JFK, why didn’t they expose him with a sex scandal? A Profumo-style scenario would have made him a world wide laughing stock instead of a heroic martyr.

    As regards RFK, he wasn’t going to win the Democratic nomination anyway. BTW, I graduated high school in 1968 and hoped RFK would win, but didn’t see how he could.

    Thirty years ago I moved away from admiring the Kennedys.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  303. Sparkon says:
    @Pincher Martin

    In eight words, I have made them go away.

    Only in your deluded, deceitful mind can you make them “go away.”

    Altgens 6

    Altgens 6 from kd rucker at Flickr

    Pres. Kennedy began clutching his throat because that’s where he’d been shot. The throat wound was confirmed as a wound of entry by attending Parkland doctor Malcom Perry.

    Several people saw the bullet hole in the windshield of JFK’s limousine, including the Ford technician who replaced the windshield.

    Dallas motorcycle patrolmen Stavis Ellis and H. R. Freeman both observed a penetrating bullet hole in the limousine windshield at Parkland Hospital. Ellis told interviewer Gil Toff in 1971: “There was a hole in the left front windshield…You could put a pencil through it…you could take a regular standard writing pencil…and stick [it] through there.” Freeman corroborated this, saying: “[I was] right beside it. I could of [sic] touched it…it was a bullet hole. You could tell what it was.”

    [David Lifton published these quotations in his 1980 book, Best Evidence.]

    Nigel Turner, in his documentary The Men Who Killed Kennedy identified George Whitaker Sr, as the Ford Motor Company employee mentioned in Weldon’s work. Douglas Horne, in his book, Inside the ARRB pg 1447 also identified Whitaker as the employee who witnessed the condition of the windshield, and verified that the hole had been caused by a shot from the front, with fragmentation and beveling present on the inside. Shards of this fragmentation called stippling, were known to have struck the President in the face and neck. These were later removed and its effects covered with wax during the process of embalming and preparation of the body for burial.

    http://merdist.com/wp/2018/12/02/the-shot-from-the-front/

    I only bother to respond to you in order to educate others here.

  304. @David In TN

    As regards RFK, he wasn’t going to win the Democratic nomination anyway. BTW, I graduated high school in 1968 and hoped RFK would win, but didn’t see how he could.

    I’ve tried to explain this to Ron before. He accepts the post-assassination myth that RFK was on his way to winning the Democratic nomination in 1968, and then the presidency, when even Kennedy’s own campaign showed him so far behind Humphrey in the delegate count that it would’ve taken a miracle for him to win the nomination.

    And, no, RFK barely beating Eugene McCarthy (another candidate who would never be the Democratic nominee that year) in California did not change that equation.

    I discussed the matter here, here, here, here and here with Ron six months ago. The last link has several relevant cites from an excellent book on the 1968 campaign.

    • Replies: @David In TN
  305. @Wielgus

    ‘…TV shows and perhaps films in the Muslim world certainly do have Israeli villains, though.’

    We have Israeli villains as well. It’s just that ours are real.

    …speaking of which, and totally off the topic, how about an article attempting to quantify Israeli criminality in the US. I know it exists — they may even prey on American Jews in particular — but to what extent?

  306. @BlackFlag

    Ah yes, I had also forgotten that detail. The courier never arrived with it. Kinda makes it clear there was something on that film, doesn’t it?

    Sorta like that young guy who filmed JFK’s car from down the street as his motorcade turned left into Dealy Plaza. The FBI confiscated his film and never returned it? Or did they return it severely mangled? Kinda makes it clear that there were shooters in the building next door to the book depository who were shooting just after the turn.

    But back to RFK, the actual physical dismantling of the places in the pantry where the bullet holes were, carting them off, and then destroying them? By the LAPD?

    The interrogation of the young Chicana who saw Sirhan and the other two go up the back stairs and then the two coming down with the girl crowing that “we did it.” Interrogated in LAPD HQ by some CIA guy flown in from Asia or somewhere, brow beating her over and over again?

    Why would these things be happening? It’s not just Mossad obviously.

  307. Wielgus says:
    @S

    He looks like such a nice young man.

  308. @Sparkon

    I only bother to respond to you in order to educate others here.

    You can’t even educate yourself. How are you going to educate others?

    Pres. Kennedy began clutching his throat because that’s where he’d been shot. The throat wound was confirmed as a wound of entry by attending Parkland doctor Malcom Perry.

    Dr. Malcolm O. Perry never examined the president’s back. He wasn’t even aware there was a wound back there. He was also not there in Trauma Room One on November 22nd to be a pathologist. As he himself later said, he had neither the training nor the inclination nor the desire to examine the president’s wounds with any care. He was there to save the president’s life. He even made that clear in the press conference later that day:

    Before he [Perry] can finish one answer, he is interrupted by another question and another. Answers about complicated medical procedures are shouted down by questions the doctors aren’t able to answer. They don’t really know how many times the president was struck nor from which direction. Perry can’t really answer those questions but thinks the wound in the throat they enlarged for the tracheotomy was an entrance wound. As to the bullet wound to the right side of the president’s head, Perry doesn’t know if that wound and the wound to the throat “are directly related” (i.e., caused by one bullet) or if the two wounds were caused by “two bullets.” Though Perry’s conclusions were not categorical, in the headlong rush to print it would be reported by some in the media that at least one of the shots definitely came from the front, not where Oswald was believed to be, to the president’s right rear.

    And as soon as the lead pathologist at Bethesda, James Humes, spoke with Dr. Perry and discovered he performed a tracheotomy on Kennedy on top of an existing wound, Humes immediately knew what happened:

    Humes telephones Parkland Hospital and speaks to Dr. Malcolm Perry, the surgeon who performed the tracheotomy on the president. Humes explains the problems the pathologists had run into in trying to determine what happened to the bullet that struck the president in the back.

    “We surmised that it worked its way out of the wound during cardiac massage,” Humes says.

    “Well, that seems unlikely, in my opinion,” Perry replies. “Are you aware that there was a wound in the throat?”

    The light flashes on for Humes when Dr. Perry tells him that he performed his surgery on an existing wound there, a small, round perforation with ragged edges.

    “Of course,” Humes realizes, “that explains it.”

    Suddenly, everything the pathologists had encountered when they explored the chest cavity made sense—the bruise over the lung, the bruised muscles surrounding the trachea. It was obvious. The bullet had exited the throat. Dr. Humes felt a great weight lift from his shoulders. He thanked Dr. Perry and hung up.

    Humes figures that the bullet must have struck the president’s back, slipped between the muscles without striking any major blood vessels, passed over the top of the right lung, bruising it, and exited the throat just below the Adam’s apple.

    Perry later testified before the Warren Commission and the HSCA that he did not know the provenance for the throat wound, but he was partially responsible for the confusion:

    Dr. Perry testified before the Warren Commission that he did not know whether the throat wound was an entrance or exit wound. However, at a press conference at Parkland Hospital Hospital commencing at 3:16 p.m. on the day of the assassination, he told the assembled media that “the wound appeared to be an entrance wound in the front of the throat.” Confronted with this apparent contradiction when he was interviewed by the HSCA, he tried to explain his press conference remarks by saying that “I thought it looked like an entrance wound because it was small, but I didn’t look for any others, and so that was just a guess.” In a subsequent interview with author Gerald Posner on April 2, 1992, Dr. Perry said that the press “took my statement at the press conference out of context. I did say it looked like an entrance wound since it was small, but I qualified it by saying that I did not know where the bullets came from. I wish now that I had not speculated. Everyone ignored my qualification.”

    The reason the press ignored Dr. Perry’s qualification is that he did not, in fact, make one. To the contrary, the transcript of the press conference, which Posner had and cites as a source, reflects just the opposite of what Perry told Posner and what Posner led his readers to believe. In response to the question “Which way was the bullet coming on the neck wound?” from a member of the press, Perry answered, “It appeared to be coming at him.” (In Dr. Perry’s mind, he may have felt unsure about what type of wound the wound to the throat was. His telling Dr. Robert McClelland, another attending physician, that the wound had “somewhat irregular margins,” which is indicative of an exit wound, supports this. But he never qualified at the press conference, at any point, his conclusion it was an entrance wound.)

    Dr. Charles Carrico was the first Parkland doctor to see the president and to start the resuscitation effort. He testified before the Warren Commission that he made no determination whether the throat wound was an entrance or exit wound. “It could have been either,” he said. However, in his 4:20 p.m. Parkland Memorial Hospital “Admission Note” on November 22, 1963, he described the wound as a “penetrating” wound. Conspiracy theorists have alleged that by the word penetrating, Carrico meant an entrance wound (e.g., “Dr. Carrico…described the throat wound as one of entrance, using the phrase: [a] small penetrating wound”). When I asked Dr. Carrico what he meant by the word penetrating, he responded, “I was not using the word penetrating to be synonymous with entry, because I didn’t know at the time whether it was an entry or exit wound. Although Mr. Webster might not agree, we physicians differentiate the mechanism causing injury into two broad groups. One is blunt trauma, which is, for instance, broken bones from car wrecks, bruises and lacerations from aggravated assault, or other wounds caused by machine or blunt force or instrument. The other is penetrating trauma, which is a wound caused usually by a knife or gunshot, or by impalement from other sharp objects.” Although Carrico was unable to determine whether the throat wound was an entrance or exit wound, he did observe that the wound was “ragged,” virtually a sure sign of an exit wound as opposed to an entrance wound, which is usually round and devoid of ragged edges.

    Several points should be kept in mind about the observations of Drs. Perry and Carrico. Neither was a pathologist. In fact, of the many doctors in the resuscitation room at Parkland Hospital, none were pathologists, much less forensic pathologists, whose specialty is determining, for legal purposes, the cause of death and, among other things, the nature (e.g., entrance as opposed to exit) of wounds. To do this, forensic pathologists examine the track of the bullet through the victim’s body, examine the victim’s clothing, take measurements and photographs, and so on. The Parkland doctors did none of these things. In fact, as recently as 1992, all four of the principal doctors on the medical team that treated the president at Parkland (Drs. Marion “Pepper” Jenkins and Charles Baxter as well as Perry and Carrico) emphasized, in an interview with JAMA, that their experiences in the trauma room at Parkland Hospital did not qualify them to reach conclusions about the direction from which the fatal missiles were fired—that is, whether the wounds were entry or exit wounds.

    So enough about Dr. Malcolm Perry. You simply don’t know what you’re talking about.

  309. @Sparkon

    But kudos to you for having the courage to cite the certifiably insane David Lifton to support your claims. A less brave man might hesitate in using as a source a man who believes Kennedy’s body was stolen and replaced before his autopsy took place, and that the bullet wounds were created in this fresh corpse by surgeons who were part of the conspiracy to make it appear as if they came from behind Kennedy.

    You have to be a special kind of fucking idiot to be that credulous.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  310. @Sirius

    Tangentially, Patrick Seale wrote an entire book on a Palestinian who specialized in false flag operations for the Zionists entitled “Abu Nidal: Gun for Hire”. The “Israelis” began an entire war based on one of those false flag operations in London in 1982, invading Lebanon to exterminate the PLO and the Palestinian presence in Lebanon. It is a valuable source on Israeli false flag operations and quite indicative of what they are capable of.

    Yes.
    The “notorious Palestinian terrorist” worked for the Mossad.
    Apparently a protege of Menachem Begin … how surprising … not.

    “Seale’s hypothesis is based on four main points:

    1 ———— Abu Nidal killings have damaged the Palestinian cause to Israel’s advantage.

    2 ————-Only 10% of the victims were Jewish, the other 90% were bystanders.

    3————–The lack of attacks on Israel.

    4 ————- Lack of involvement in the Intifada, and Israel’s failure to retaliate against Abu Nidal’s groups.”

    Just like ISIS aka Israeli Secret Intelligence Service.

    http://whale.to/c/abu_nidal2.html

  311. gatobart says:
    @Patrick McNally

    You are right in that Angleton was the kind of guy who could have pulled something like the Dealey Plaza operation, after all he had the means and the opportunity. As for a motive…well, the Israeli angle is as good as any other but then we come to the same “but” as before: if Mossad wanted to get JFK all they needed was to bring to the open some of his dirty secrets, his sexual misconduct for example. As things didn’t happen that way, I don’t think the answer lies there. Now, bear with me:

    As a general rule, by simple human nature powerful people don’t like just to eliminate their enemies, they like above all to enjoy watching them going down. And the best way to enjoy it is making them suffer total, devastating humiliation. That is what many forget. Gangsters and lowlifes in general may just eliminate physically the people they hate but powerful people prefer shooting them down from their perches, dragging them through the mud because they know their enemies are as proud, selfish and arrogant as themselves and so they know that for them humiliation is worse than death himself. So Plaza Dealey doesn’t have the signature “powerful enemies” on it, because if that was the case then these enemies would have been depriving themselves of the best part of their revenge, watching the face of their enemy while he is going down. Like the face J.R. Ewing puts when he realizes that this worst enemy, Cliff Barnes, has achieved complete victory over him:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehcPEehITWA (4:41)

    That leaves only two possibilities, as I said:

    a) desperate and yet not so powerful enemies thirsting for revenge who profited of the opportunity given by the occasion to take him out, helped maybe by some powerful individuals in government, or b) people in government who considered themselves patriots who had no choice but to do what it had to be done. I think it was Groden the JFK researcher who put it that way, the people behind the JFK assassination considered themselves above all patriots who were saving the country.

    • Replies: @Patrick McNally
  312. @Pincher Martin

    Thanks for the reply. Ron Unz was a few months short of his seventh birthday when Sirhan shot RFK. He relies on the mythology the Kennedy worshippers built up about the 1968 campaign.

    Ron hasn’t addressed why a group of plotters would construct an elaborate “conspiracy” instead of discrediting and humiliating JFK by exposing his personal transgressions. BTW, this came close to happening twice in 1963.

  313. I recently finished reading an excellent book on the JFK assassination. A Cruel and Shocking Act: The Secret History of the Kennedy Assassination was written by Philip Shenon, a former NYT reporter, who also wrote a very good book on the 9/11 Commission more than a decade ago.

    https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fimages.macmillan.com%2Ffolio-assets%2Fmacmillan_us_frontbookcovers_1000H%2F9781250060754.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

    Shenon covers a lot of new territory I had never read before. He interviewed all of the Warren Commission Assistant Counsel members (Willens, Redlich, Coleman, Specter, etc.) and their staff members who were still alive at the time he was researching for his book.

    More impressively, Shenon went to Mexico to interview many people who claimed to see Oswald in that country and whose testimony contradicts key parts of the Warren Commission. He also used the FOIA to ferret out a lot of revealing FBI and CIA documents which had eluded less determined researchers.

    The result is a fresh perspective that shows the CIA and FBI lied about key elements of both their surveillance and later, after the assassination, investigation of Oswald. But it also shows that the Warren Commission still made a good faith effort to find the full truth.

    Shenon blames four people for the failures of the Warren Commission to ally the public’s concerns that Oswald was the sole shooter of President Kennedy. They are FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, DCI Richard Helms, Warren Commission Chairman and Chief Justice Earl Warren and Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy.

    The first two names on the list are not likely to surprise anyone here. But Shenon does not blame Hoover and Helms for participating in a conspiracy to murder JFK. He doesn’t even suggest it. But he does find fresh and compelling evidence, especially concerning the CIA in Mexico, that they covered up their complicity in not warning U.S. authorities about Oswald’s potential for violence based on his actions in Mexico.

    Earl Warren is blamed for seeking to protect the Kennedys (and other witnesses) from not only the lurid details any investigation would normally be required to handle (such as autopsy photos and X-rays), but even from from routine questioning. The interview with Jackie Kennedy was over so fast that it barely covered any ground at all. No interviews were asked of RFK and Lyndon Johnson, even though both men were interviewed for William Manchester’s upcoming book on the assassination.

    Warren’s proxy, General Counsel J. Lee Rankin was such a prude, he even tried to retract information about Oswald’s venereal disease which he contracted in Japan. He didn’t think such information was necessary in the report. He also removed any vague references to off-color jokes, Ruby’s strippers, and the president’s underclothes.

    More seriously, Warren denied key witnesses and evidence to his commission staff. He should not have prevented his staff from interviewing Sylvia Duran in the U.S., for example.

    But, as Shenon writes, “…it is clear that Robert Kennedy bears much responsibility for the fact that, half a century after the assassination, opinion polls show that most Americans are convinced today that they are still being denied the truth about the president’s murder.” Kennedy had good reason not to help the Warren Commission find the truth.

  314. Sparkon says:
    @Pincher Martin

    Walls of text, name calling, and F-bombs are all you’ve got when you’ve lost the debate, and so you explode in obscenities like a drunken Marine.

    A wound of entry is a wound of entry. Dr. Perry saw it and so did Dr. Crenshaw. They were there at Parkland on Nov. 22, 1963. You weren’t.

    Dr. Perry and Dr. Crenshaw both made unambiguous statements on Nov. 22, 1963 that Pres. Kennedy’s throat wound was a wound of entry. Later, Dr. Perry was pressured to change his statement, and confided he thought they were “going to kill me.”

    Dr. Charles Crenshaw was the second trauma surgeon to see Kennedy in Trauma Room One. At the time he was a surgical resident covering ‘gunshot central’ – the Parkland Hospital ER – and had seen literally hundreds of gun shot wounds (entry and exit). He clearly describes seeing an entry wound in the throat, midline, just below the larynx (adam’s apple) and an entry wound in the right frontotemporal region. He kept quiet out of fear for some 27 years, having that same day witnessed Federal agents stealing JFK’s body at gunpoint, in violation of Texas law and illegally breaking the chain of evidence, thus denying the Kennedy family and the nation the service of an extremely experience[d] forensic Pathologist, Dr. Rose.

    In any event, when Pres. Kennedy’s back was examined during a subsequent “official,” but illegal autopsy at Bethesda, as I wrote previously

    The autopsy performed by Dr. Humes at Bethesda was witnessed by two FBI agents who wrote in their report that Dr. Humes discovered the back wound was shallow, and did not have an exit. He could feel the end of the wound with his fingertip and described it as having no exit. No bullet was found in that back wound. Indeed, the FBI report notes that the autopsy doctors were perplexed in that a full-body X-ray of the deceased JFK showed no intact bullets anywhere in his body.

    All the bullets had been removed from Pres. Kennedy’s body before this “official” autopsy at Bethesda conducted by Dr. Humes.

    Dr. Humes found that the back wound had no point of exit, and therefore was not and could not have been connected to the throat wound, which was a wound of entry that matched up with the bullet hole in the windshield.

    The shot that hit Pres. Kennedy in the throat was fired from a point in front of the motorcade, probably from a location in or near the parking lot behind the south knoll. But there were probably several assassins shooting at Pres. Kennedy from positions in front of his motorcade.

    According to reputed mobster “Tony Gambino,”

    … he was in Dallas when Kennedy was shot and the fatal bullet came from a shooter located in an underground storm drain.

    “I was there when he was shot and I know for a fact Rosselli was in the storm drain doing the shooting and Frank Sturgiss was also part of the hit team,” said Gambino.

    http://www.alamoministries.com/content/english/newsreleases/mafia_vatican.html

    More on Roselli’s role in the assassination of JFK here:

    https://jfkplayersandwitnesses.wordpress.com/2013/11/12/johnny-roselli-the-jfk-shooter-in-the-storm-drain/

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  315. @gatobart

    My response to that would have to be that the Israel lobby really only came into full power with the JFK-assassination. I realize that there are some who will swear up and down that everything has been masterminded by the Rothschilds for 3 centuries now. I consider that absurd. In the 1956 war Eisenhower had now problem telling Egypt, France and Israel to turn around and go back. In the 1967 war Johnson simply sucked on while the USS Liberty was blasted apart. In between these 2 events, the inflection point occurred at Dallas.

    One of the reasons that Angleton is such a significant figure is that he played the pioneering role on enabling the Mossad to network itself through the CIA. In the early days after 1948 the CIA was not some muppet for the Mossad, although they may have sometimes seemed like that in more recent decades. I don’t see any conflict between your general philosophy of how people who are really entrenched in power may act and how David Ben-Gurion et al responded to JFK. The Israel lobby was a rising power in 1963, not any kind of a supreme lord.

  316. @Patrick McNally

    However the point about RFK is simply that by 1968 he was no longer involved in pushing for investigations

    You’re just goalpost-shifting here. Sure, your claim that you were using “AIPAC” as a generic term for Israel foreign malign influence operations is a reasonable one, but trying to say that you were using “JFK” in a “heuristic” [?} sense when you were specifically addressing the issue of JFK’s vs. RFK’s involvement is simply ludicrous. Your original claim was that:

    It was JFK [i.e. as opposed to RFK] who became embroiled in a fight with the Israel lobby over both Dimona and “AIPAC”.

    Read the Yeagley memo I posted from a month before the JFK assassination, which summarizes the DOJ/ AZC meeting. RFK’s Department of Justice was determined to go ahead with requiring the AZC to register their foreign malign influence operation, and the AZC was very worried about it:
    “it was the opinion of most of the persons affiliated with the Council that such registration would be so publicized by the American Council on Judaism that it would eventually destroy the Zionist movement.”

    In other words, RFK’s effort to register the AZC as a foreign lobby was perceived by the Tribe as a very serious threat at the time.

    the point about RFK is simply that by 1968 he was no longer involved in pushing for investigations

    Sure, they won on the Israel First issue long before that. Once LBJ was in that pretty much took care of it. And once Katzenbach took over as AG in 1964, it was all over. But we’re talking about a tribe that still gleefully chews on “Haman’s Ears;” that routinely gets riled up about “enemies” [real or imagined] from thousands of years ago. Criminal organizations often kill for reasons of revenge. You think they just “forgot” about a goy who — in their perception — threatened to “destroy the Zionist movement” a mere 5 years before? Yeah right.

    The motive for bumping him off in 1968 would simply have been that he wanted to carry forward investigation into his brother’s killing.

    The two are not mutually exclusive as motivations.

    • Replies: @Patrick McNally
  317. It’s always remarkable how, in discussions of the JFK assassination, people seem so resolutely incurious about Jacob Rubinstein’s motivations. “So Oswald was shot by a mishpucka — who just happened to show up in the basement of the police station 2 minutes before the cops brought Oswald down? Oh well… guess he must have been a really patriotic guy, who was just enraged that the President had been assassinated, and decided on his own to do something about it. Clearly nothing to do with the jewish mob, because reasons.”

    [Incidentally, when I did a search for “Jacob Rubinstein,” this was the top hit: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/cecil-county-man-charged-with-distributing-child-pornography/ar-BB1dK1gq ]

    • Replies: @gatobart
  318. @James Forrestal

    If you don’t like heuristic phrases then let’s be more technical and replace “JFK” with “the JFK administration” since that’s what is talked about when one goes into RFK’s battles back in the early 1960s. In 1968 he wasn’t really conducting any more battles but just trying to get elected a goody too-shoo Democrat. Some other posters on this board have even pointed out that he didn’t necessarily seem like the strongest candidate and could have likely been beaten in a straight election. But he symbolized the demand for an investigation into Dallas and that functional role would have remained even had he lost the election.

    • Replies: @James Forrestal
  319. @Sparkon

    Walls of text, name calling, and F-bombs are all you’ve got when you’ve lost the debate, and so you explode in obscenities like a drunken Marine.

    That “wall of text” is called evidence and testimony that refutes all your claims. You can’t deal with it honestly, so you whine about my tone. You’ve earned my scorn with your stupidity; you’ve yet to earn my respect.

    A wound of entry is a wound of entry. Dr. Perry saw it and so did Dr. Crenshaw.

    No, they did not, as even Dr. Perry later admitted, which I documented in that “wall of text” you complained about.

    As for Dr. Crenshaw, he was neither one of the first doctors into room nor was he a member of the primary team of surgeons dealing with Kennedy’s wounds nor was he a pathologist. He’s a documented liar. Even Dr. Robert McClelland, who is the only other one of the at least thirteen doctors who were in Trauma Room One that day and who also believes there was a conspiracy to kill Kennedy, distances himself from Crenshaw’s views.

    Crenshaw was pretty much a trainee on November 22nd, 1963. He was a twenty-nine-year-old junior resident with little experience in surgery and none in pathology. He wouldn’t finish his residency at Parkland until 1965.

    Here is a list of the doctors who were in Trauma Room One on November 22nd, 1963

    Malcolm Perry
    Charles Carrico

    Don T. Curtis
    Martin G. White
    Charles Crenshaw *
    Ronald C. Jones
    Charles R. Baxter
    William Kemp Clark
    Robert McClelland *
    Paul C. Peters
    Marion T. Jenkins
    Adolph H. Giesecke
    Kenneth Salyer

    The four doctors whose names I have put in bold were the primary team of surgeons trying to save Kennedy’s life. The two doctors whose names I have listed with an asterisk are the only ones who have actively promoted any conspiracy theories based on what they saw in Trauma Room One, and neither one is a qualified pathologist. Just as important, neither one had the opportunity to inspect Kennedy’s body.

    Doctors Perry, Carrico, Baxter, and Jenkins have all stated that nothing they saw that day in Trauma Room One precluded Kennedy for being shot from above and behind.

    Game, set, match.

    In any event, when Pres. Kennedy’s back was examined during a subsequent “official,” but illegal autopsy at Bethesda, as I wrote previously

    If the autopsy was illegal, blame the Kennedys. Jackie and the Kennedy entourage were the primary reason the body was removed from Parkland. Later on the Air Force One, as it was returning to the nation’s capital, Jackie requested that a quick autopsy take place at Bethesda because Jack was a navy man. At first, she didn’t want an autopsy at all, but after JFK’s physician, Admiral George Burkley, told her that one would be necessary, she requested Bethesda Naval Hospital.

    All the bullets had been removed from Pres. Kennedy’s body before this “official” autopsy at Bethesda conducted by Dr. Humes.

    Baloney. As X-ray photos later showed, and much to the embarrassment of the three pathologists who conducted the autopsy, one large bullet fragment remained in Kennedy’s brain even after the autopsy was completed. They just missed it.

    But a lot of metal fragments of the single projectile to traverse Kennedy’s skull and brain were removed.

    And does this wound on Kennedy’s back look like an exit wound, doofus? Does it look like a wound caused by a projectile which first went through glass and then Kennedy’s throat only to come out so cleanly on the other side?

    https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi0.heartyhosting.com%2Fwww.nationalenquirer.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F08%2Fjfk-assassination-john-f-kennedy-autopsy-photos-9.jpg%3Ffit%3D1380%252C880%26ssl%3D1&f=1&nofb=1

    Dr. Humes found that the back wound had no point of exit, and therefore was not and could not have been connected to the throat wound…

    He found no such thing, you moron, and I just showed the quotes proving that to you.

    The shot that hit Pres. Kennedy in the throat was fired from a point in front of the motorcade, probably from a location in or near the parking lot behind the south knoll. But there were probably several assassins shooting at Pres. Kennedy from positions in front of his motorcade.

    A cavalcade of lies promoted by a deluded man.

    • Troll: Mulga Mumblebrain
  320. gatobart says:
    @James Forrestal

    “So Oswald was shot by a mishpucka — who just happened to show up in the basement of the police station 2 minutes before the cops brought Oswald down? Oh well… guess he must have been a really patriotic guy, who was just enraged that the President had been assassinated, and decided on his own to do something about it”

    As I suspect that you are referring to my post only for the “patriotic” mention, this is my answer: couldn’t Jewish mobster Jack Rubinstein have felt patriotic also while being part of a plot engineered by self declared patriots who thought that by killing JFK they were saving the country…? who are you to tell us he he couldn’t possibly think of himself as a patriot while doing it…?

    But I won’t go there because I don’t need it, as everything what Ruby did after the killing and until the moment he murdered Oswald has the signature of a desperate man, a man fearing for his life. First, several witnesses declared later having seen him in front of the TSBD a few minutes right after the shooting (probably looking for Oswald). When confronted with this testimonies, he flatly denied he was ever there. He denied it despite the existence of a picture taken in the lieu at the time, which according to those who were able to take a peek at it showed a man who looked like him and which part of the photo was later cut out (i think by the WC). He was later seen at the police HQ where Oswald was being held and he even had the gall to correct some authority when this last misspelled the name of the pro or anti-Cuban association Oswald had been linked to. That has brought many researchers to concluded that he was stalking Oswald, which he strongly denied, which is logical also considering that he could have then been accused of first degree murder which could have sent him right to the chair. Then, after he shot Oswald and was taken in, he seemed very agitated and his main concern seemed to have been to know if Oswald had died, rather than his own fate, and when he was finally told he was dead indeed, he became calm and almost at peace with himself.

    All this is on record. Oh, I was forgetting about Parkland. He was seen also at the hospital, among the many who had gathered there after Kennedy had been brought in and he was even recognized and acknowledged by some acquaintances, among them a Dallas journalist. Once again he denied ever having been there. Maybe it is just my wild imagination, but all these little anecdotes paint to me a very clear picture. Jack Ruby had been assigned the task of handling the patsy and so he did, but he had expressly asked beforehand for the insurance that Oswald would be killed before he ever had the chance to come out of the TSBD, or be arrested inside or out of it. And that it why he went to make sure they have held their part of the bargain as soon as he heard the shooting. Since then until the 24th his life turned into a frantic race to repair his mistake, his naivete of having been fooled by his associates on the other side of the law about the final disposal of the patsy. He was probably told, or he knew anyway, what would happen to him if he failed again, if he didn’t fix his mistake.

    I referred in my post to the people in charge of this operation and those organizing the details as self declared patriots, and in that scheme of things Ruby was just a pawn, a minor player, a disposable tool. It didn’t matter how he felt about himself. He knew all that so he didn’t need to think of himself as anything, all he knew is that he had to do what he was told to do.

    • Replies: @James Forrestal
  321. CD says:
    @Godfree Roberts

    JFK created the perfect storm and it destroyed him.

  322. Sparkon says:

    Two FBI agents, FRANCIS X. O’NEILL, JR. and JAMES W. SIBERT, witnessed the autopsy of Pres. Kennedy’s body at Bethesda on Nov. 22, 1963, and completed a report, FD 302, which confirms what I’ve written above: JFK’s back wound was shallow, with no exit.

    During the latter stages of this autopsy, Dr. HUMES located an opening which appeared to be a bullet hole which was below the shoulders and two inches to the right of the middle line of the spinal column.

    This opening was probed by Dr. HUMES with the finger, at which time it was determined that the trajectory of the missile entering at this point had entered at a downward position of 45 to 60 degrees. Further probing determined that the distance travelled by this missile was a short distance inasmuch as the end of the opening could be felt with the finger.

    Inasmuch as no complete bullet of any size could be located in the brain area and likewise no bullet could be located in the back or any other area of the body as determined by total body X–Rays and inspection revealing there was no point of exit, the individuals performing the autopsy were at a loss to explain why they could find no bullets.

    http://22november1963.org.uk/sibert-and-oneill-report#sibert-oneill-memo

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  323. ivan says:
    @Sparkon

    — You mistake quantity for quality.

    Exactly; like the Warren Commission

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  324. Pheasant says:
    @onetwothree

    ‘–if you stalk someone’

    And an assasination (i.e ambush) is what exactly?

    That thing abour .22lr and .223 tumbling is pure Bs – hence why I didnt include it.

  325. bayviking says:
    @Patrick McNally

    Agreed, we will never know what JFK’s final decision in these matters might have been. Agreed Israel had more at stake than the mobsters, but both have demonstrated the means when they had the motive. The string of deaths surrounding those subpoenaed to appear before and after the HSCA point directly to Trafficante, since the two other suspects died in obvious mob murders prior to providing any testimony, to which we can add Sam Giancana and Jimmy Hoffa, and at least five others, some in mob style killings, others not necessarily so, but very conveniently eliminated.

    If only we knew who fired from the grassy knoll. The only name I have ever heard put forth, which I no longer remember, was a Frenchman. One interesting tidbit, from a reputable retired FBI agent driving under the overpass next to the grassy knoll with his granddaughter. This was revealed in the BBC Oswald mock trial, in which the Jury convicted him. Jerry Spence was defending Oswald. His witness, the retired FBI agent saw a man behind the overpass running to a car and putting a long object in the back seat. Because he was with his granddaughter he chose not to confront the car, which he followed and wrote the license plate number down instead. He dutifully returned that information to the FBI where it was subsequently lost.

    I do not rule out Mossad involvement because I know too little about it and have bought another book, “Final Judgement”, which I have yet to read. But the documentation Waldron and Hartmann provide link all three assassinations, JFK, MLK and RFK to Carlos Marcello, with different motives between the brothers and MLK. I fail to see Israel having any interest in killing MLK. Its very possible Mossad provided support for the highest level targets.

  326. @Patrick McNally

    1. Perhaps you might benefit from looking up what the word “heuristic” actually means? It is not a synonym for “euphemism.”

    2. And in 1968, the Israel Firsters still hated RFK for trying to hold their organization to the same standard as other foreign malign influence operations — or, as they perceived it through the distorting lens of toxic semitism — threatening to “destroy the Zionist movement” a mere 5 years before.

    And again — the two are not mutually exclusive as motivations. The presence of one does not necessitate the absence of the other.

  327. @gatobart

    It’s always revealing when you make a general observation… and get a guilty response from a specific individual. No, my observation about the remarkable lack of curiosity shown about Rubinstein’s motivations wasn’t directed at anyone in particular. It was based on a combination of past experience and a quick search for “Ruby” in this thread — i.e. a simple heuristic. It was just an observation about the obvious obfuscation that one sees over and over again on that topic.

    But it prompted a 5 paragraph-long screed “explaining” why patriotism is typically a primary motivation when organized crime figures kill. Ah yes, who could forget the Purple Gang and Murder, Inc. — just a bunch of loosely-associated individuals out there fighting for truth, justice, and the American Way. Each mishpucka choosing his victims completely on his own, in accordance with his own perception of “American national interests”… just like Mr. Rubinstein. Sounds legit.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
    , @gatobart
  328. @Sparkon

    Sparkon is relying on Lifton’s purposeful misreading of the two FBI agents’ report who were present at the autopsy. Lifton fabricates his entire theory based primarily on that misreading.

    As for the missing bullet, Dr. Humes cleared up the mystery by calling Parkland Hospital’s Dr. Perry, the lead surgeon who was tasked with trying to save Kennedy’s life earlier that same day. Perry explained about the tracheotomy he performed on Kennedy’s throat wound to save his life. Humes, who first thought that the bullet might have fallen out because of a cardiac massage, immediately understood what had happened. The mystery was solved. The bullet that entered Kennedy’s upper back had exited via Kennedy’s throat.

    Jackie Kennedy’s presence at Bethesda for the duration of the autopsy prevented the doctors from doing a dissection of the back and neck wound to trace the bullet’s path. This would have helped to deduce the exact angle of the shot. The surgeons did determine, however, that both bullets were fired at a downward angle from behind the president.

    • Replies: @bayviking
  329. @ivan

    That’s ironic given that almost all the prominent critics of the Warren Commission investigation don’t think it went nearly long enough.

    In any case, if quantity does not equal quality, brevity in your case certainly does not equal an argument let alone a serious case.

    • Replies: @ivan
  330. @James Forrestal

    Motive is meaningless in assigning guilt to a crime. Even Mark Lane has said as much in one of his books.

    The evidence and intent are all that mattered. As soon as I see some know-nothing wanting to discuss motive, I know he has no interest in finding out what actually happened.

    • Replies: @James Forrestal
  331. gatobart says:
    @James Forrestal

    I guess my guilt is that of not having still found out that this was a Mossad operation.

    Anyway, the saying “Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel is not there for nothing”. During WW2 the Sicilian mob helped the U.S., through the likes of Lucky Luciano, to get through the South of the Italy without many losses, specially human, and that was greatly appreciated, so much so I think L.L., who was in prison in the U.S., was allowed to return to Italy as a free man. All that made these people feel good about themselves, they were “American patriots” and recognized at last as such. That is why there is no reason to discard de participation of the mob (be that Italian or Jewish) through people like Jack Ruby, in an endeavor engineered by some prominent patriotic “American” figures to save their own country from something terrible, a Commie takeover, nuclear world, you name it. I think the people involved in the Plaza Dailey must have felt that they were being very patriotic, with reason or not, and the feeling must have tricked down to pawns and foot soldiers like Ruby himself.

    As for my analysis, I won’t point fingers because what I am interested about is not finding culprits but unveiling the mechanics of the operation , how the events of that day happened, to put together all the pieces in this puzzle. I have seen that everybody seem to have their own culprit so I will leave that to them, specially “Americans”, this is their a part of their History, not mine.

    BTW, Al Capone felt he was a great patriot also, and he couldn’t understand why the US government was after him and his kind after all, when when the business he was doing in just three counties (as USMC Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler so aptly put it) was the same Washington had been doing around the world.

    • Replies: @James Forrestal
  332. gatobart says:

    “The bullet that entered Kennedy’s upper back had exited via Kennedy’s throat”

    And this is the clown who demands to be taken seriously. Humes at that point was saying whatever they were asking from him and so he ended up talking nonsense, this being the icing on the cake. For this to have happened at the moment of that shot Kennedy should have been on all four on the floor of the limousine or at least sitting in a fatal position in his seat. The wound in the back of JFK, the one Humes explored with his own finger, not with that of anyone else, had no exit, it went barely an inch or two inside the body and then stopped. Also, this wound was located almost six inches below that of the throat.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  333. @gatobart

    Humes at that point was saying whatever they were asking from him…

    Prove it. First identify who are “they” and then explain how “they” forced Dr. Humes to talk “nonsense,” which sixteen other forensic pathologists would also agree with. Did “they” get to all seventeen of those forensic pathologists spread out over fifteen years in time?

    You can’t do it. Because you have no idea what you’re talking about.

    For this to have happened at the moment of that shot Kennedy should have been on all four on the floor of the limousine or at least sitting in a fatal [sic] position in his seat.

    Nope. All it takes is a slight forward tilt of the head. Even a nearly imperceptible head tilt can dramatically change the location of bullet’s exit.

    The wound in the back of JFK, the one Humes explored with his own finger, not with that of anyone else, had no exit, it went barely an inch or two inside the body and then stopped.

    LOL! Makes perfect sense. We all know that bullets which are traveling at a velocity of nearly 2,000 feet per second will enter a body, hit no bone (i.e., no fragmentation), and then decide to turn back around and go out the same hole they came in.

    As Dr. Perry said to Dr. Humes when the latter proposed that perhaps cardiac massage had pushed the bullet out of the body, that seems highly unlikely.

    • Replies: @gatobart
  334. Sparkon says:

    In addition to killing Lee Harvey Oswald, was hoodlum Jack Ruby directly involved in the assassination of JFK? If an IRS informant is to be believed, at the very least, Ruby had foreknowledge of the impending hit on Pres. John F. Kennedy.

    In 1977, an informant contacted the Dallas IRS office with a sensational claim, which was passed on to the FBI.

    “The informant stated that on the morning of the assassination, Ruby contacted him and asked if he would ‘like to watch the fireworks.’ He was with Jack Ruby and standing at the corner of the Postal Annex Building facing the Texas School Book Depository Building at the time of the shooting. Immediately after the shooting, Ruby left and headed toward the area of the Dallas Morning News Building.”

    https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32149267.pdf

    This is far from the only indication that Ruby was involved in some way. Reports have Oswald dropping into a restaurant near Ruby’s club in the early morning hours of Nov. 22, 1963, where he told staff he was waiting for Jack Ruby. When Ruby showed up, the two men huddled at a table talking for some time.

    Additionally, women working near Dealey Plaza knew both Lee Harvey Oswald and Jack Ruby, and saw Ruby hand Oswald a pistol the morning of Nov. 22, 1963:

    FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

    Date December 1, 1963

    Mrs. EVELYN HARRIS, 1812 Ardmore, who is employed by the T.B. Butler Publishing Company, stated that… her daughter and some of the other girls knew LEE HARVEY OSWALD who apparently spoke Spanish well and ate with them at a nearby restaurant. They were reportedly familiar with JACK RUBY.

    She stated on November 22, 1963, the girls, all of Spanish descent, were watching the Presidential parade from a window of the sewing room. They reportedly observed Jack Ruby walking up and down the street near the Texas School Book Depository Building and when Oswald came out of the building, they saw Ruby give him a pistol.

    Mrs. LOPEZ stated after the killing of OSWALD the girls were afraid to contact the Dallas Police Department and as far as she knew no one had interviewed any of the girls in connection with the President’s assassination or the killing of OSWALD.

    on 11/30/63 at Tyler, Texas File # DL 89-43 44-1693
    by Special Agent ALAN L. MANNING/csh Date Dictated 12/1/63

    https://alt.conspiracy.jfk.narkive.com/GAg8wyiT/fbi-memo-says-ruby-seen-putting-nitrate-laden-pistol-in-oswald-s-palms-before-the-president-arrived-

    Finally, Julia Ann Mercer stated she had been stalled in traffic behind a pick-up truck that was parked in front of the familiar north grassy knoll. She watched a man unload what she thought was a rifle case from the truck, and walk up the grassy knoll with it. She identified the driver of the truck as, you guessed it, Jack Ruby.

    f. Julia Ann Mercer, wife of a former congressman, was caught in a traffic jam near the grassy knoll sometime before the arrival of the motorcade. She saw a man get out of a pickup truck carrying a poorly concealed rifle and climb up the grassy knoll.

    The next day she identified the driver of the pickup as Jack Ruby. This was the day before Ruby shot Oswald. The FBI altered her statement so that it did not mention the positive identification. The sheriff’s office filed a notarized affidavit that said Mercer was not able to identify the driver. Mercer said that she had never been brought before a notary and that her signature on the affidavit had been forged.

    https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/3525-jack-ruby/

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  335. gatobart says:
    @Pincher Martin

    Silbert & O’Neill say you have no clue. This is what they wrote in their FBI report, one that constitutes one of the few elements of evidence in this case that no one has ever disputed:

    “During the latter stages of this autopsy, Dr. HUMES located an opening which appeared to be a bullet hole which was below the shoulders and two inches to the right of the middle line of the spinal column.

    This opening was probed by Dr. HUMES with the finger, at which time it was determined that the trajectory of the missile entering at this point had entered at a downward position of 45 to 60 degrees. Further probing determined that the distance travelled by this missile was a short distance inasmuch as the end of the opening could be felt with the finger.

    Inasmuch as no complete bullet of any size could be located in the brain area and likewise no bullet could be located in the back or any other area of the body as determined by total body X–Rays and inspection revealing there was no point of exit, the individuals performing the autopsy were at a loss to explain why they could find no bullets”

    “The Bethesda autopsy was conducted by James Humes, who was assisted by J. Thornton Boswell. Neither of them had ever performed an autopsy on a gunshot victim before. Boswell’s diagram of the wounds shows a wound to the back about 5 1/2 inches below the collar. It was verified by Admiral George Burkley, the President’s personal physician”

    Worth mentioning, both the jacket and the shirt the president was wearing show a bullet hole at the same location, at 51/2 inches, coinciding with the wound in his back, which obliterates the “argument” put forward by WC fans that at the moment of the shot he had them both “bunched up”, so their holes misrepresent the “true” location of where the bullet had hit him.

    What we see as an angle of entry in this travesty of diagram anyway…? Instead of a downward angle of 45 to 60 degree, at those present during the autopsy observed, one far smaller (of around 30 degree) and instead of a back wound a neck wound…! Did I say already that it is not worth taking you seriously…?

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  336. @Sparkon

    All of these spurious reports have been known for decades and discredited. There is absolutely no proof that Ruby knew Oswald.

    While Julia Ann Mercer reported seeing someone suspicious on the overpass the afternoon of the assassination, none of the details she reported that day make any sense. Why would assassins choose to unload their weapons on a busy overpass in view of everyone (and where their vehicle was blocking traffic), including three policemen standing nearby.

    Mercer let no one know until 1983 that two of the men she saw on the overpass that day were Oswald and Ruby, which will come as somewhat of a surprise to the Oswald who was working in the TSDB at the time. Mercer’s 1983 account includes seeing Ruby handing off a rifle to Oswald around 11:00 AM (so much for that “patsy”), when numerous coworkers of Oswald can account for his whereabouts at the TSDB and when Ruby is known to be at the offices of the Dallas Morning News.

    As for any Oswald-Ruby associations, even the pro-conspiracy biographer of Jack Ruby, Seth Kantor, could find nothing, writing “There is no evidence,…not a shred of proof…that Ruby and Oswald even knew each other, despite claims by several people over the years that the two had been seen together.”

    The same goes for the Dallas reporters, all of whom wanted to break the local “story of the century” by finding a connection between Oswald and Ruby:

    As Dallas Morning News reporter Jim Ewell would later say, “If there’d ever been any connection between Oswald, Tippit, and Jack Ruby, we would be talking about it [now] as if it happened.” He pointed out, “There was an all out intensive effort on the part of the press [in Dallas] to be the first to find these connections, and there were some very good reporters in those days looking into that.” Ewell and fellow Morning News reporter Hugh Aynesworth were a part of that effort. He said they all wanted to “break the ‘story of the century’” that there was a “conspiracy behind the assassination of Kennedy.” Also in Dallas, he adds, were “some of the best newspapermen” from around the country “trying to find those angles. You also had the best from the television networks.” But Ewell said no one found anything. “It was never established.”

    • Replies: @S
  337. @gatobart

    You’re missing the gems I’ve already dropped in this thread. Sparkon mentioned the two FBI agents’ report of the autopsy in #327, including the specific paragraph you quoted, and I responded to it in #333.

    “The Bethesda autopsy was conducted by James Humes, who was assisted by J. Thornton Boswell. Neither of them had ever performed an autopsy on a gunshot victim before. Boswell’s diagram of the wounds shows a wound to the back about 5 1/2 inches below the collar. It was verified by Admiral George Burkley, the President’s personal physician”

    The diagram was a rough sketch drawn from memory, and it was made for the Warren Commission (which was not allowed to look at the autopsy photos and X-rays because Earl Warren thought it ghoulish and inappropriate). And it was Humes, not Boswell, who provided the sketch. Autopsy photos and X-rays revealed the actual location of the wound. Why would anyone today who was not an idiot privilege a sketch over the autopsy photos which clearly shows where the wound was located on JFK’s back?

    The autopsy was actually performed by three surgeons, not two. Humes, who did have a little experience with military personnel killed by gunshot wounds. Boswell, who was “the chief of pathology at the Naval Medical School who assisted Humes, was board-certified in clinical and pathological anatomy but was not trained in forensic pathology….”

    And the name you did not mention, Pierre Finck, who was a board-certified forensic pathologist. At the time of the autopsy, Finck was chief of the Wound Ballistics Pathology Branch of the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, where he had been since he received his board certification as a forensic pathologist in 1961. “During that time he had reviewed over four hundred armed forces and civilian autopsy cases, many of them involving bullet wounds. Between 1955 and 1958, several years before the president’s autopsy, Finck had personally performed approximately two hundred autopsies, many of them pertaining to trauma, including bullet wounds, as pathologist at the U.S. Army Hospital in Frankfort, Germany.”

    • Replies: @gatobart
  338. @Laurent Guyénot

    I startled when you quoted the Bethesda Naval Hospital because I have just started the translation of Martin’s book on Forrestal. I guess this important place is covered by many amiable services ;D

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  339. ivan says:
    @Pincher Martin

    http://22november1963.org.uk/bertrand-russell-16-questions-on-the-assassination

    The reason the Warren Commission is disbelieved is because it did not conduct a proper investigation. See the above sixteen questions from Bertrand Russell.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  340. Sparkon says:

    The infamous “girl in the polka dot dress” has been identified by authors Tim Tate and Brad Johnson as Elayn Neal. She passed away in 2012. According to family members, she was married to Jerry Capeheart, who shortly before his death reportedly told his son that he’d worked for the CIA on “on mind-control experimentation.”

    And the girl in that polka-dot dress? Over the past 50 years, a succession of researchers has assembled a long list of possible candidates, but none could identify her.

    And then, last year, my co-author Brad finally traced her.

    He’d started the quest by tracking down seven surviving eyewitnesses and asking them to look at a photographic line-up of possible contenders.

    Among the 12 photos, he included one of a woman whose family had contacted one of Kennedy’s aides, but who’d never been publicly associated with the day of the shooting.

    It wouldn’t be her [sic], thought Brad, but he added her picture just to make up the numbers.

    To his astonishment, each of the seven witnesses independently picked her as the closest match to the girl in the polka-dot dress. Her name was Elayn Neal, and she’d died five years before.

    After contacting her family, Brad discovered that she’d married in 1966 but used to disappear from home, without explanation, for long periods.

    Her children recalled that she’d always seemed haunted by something, and often expressed fears that she was being followed.

    They also talked about her obsession with a white dress with black polka-dots, which she’d often take out of storage just to look at it.

    But it was only after her death that a nephew wrote to one of Bobby Kennedy’s aides, enclosing a photo of Elayn and asking if she could possibly have been the girl in the polka-dot dress. The aide had then asked Brad to investigate further.

    So, after all seven eyewitnesses apparently recognised Elayn, he dug a little deeper. Her husband, Jerry Capehart, he discovered, had refused to let her wear the polka-dot dress, and this had caused explosive rows between them.

    But the most spine-chilling discovery of all was what Capehart had done for a living in the Sixties. Just before his own death, he’d told his son that he’d worked for the CIA — ‘on mind-control experimentation’.

    — Adapted by Corinna Honan from The Assassination Of Robert F. Kennedy by Tim Tate and Brad Johnson

    https://expressdigest.com/was-bobby-kennedys-killer-hypnotised-by-the-cias-girl-in-a-polka-dot-dress/

  341. gatobart says:
    @Pincher Martin

    Anyone with a working brain inside his skull and without any hidden agenda will realize that the official narrative doesn’t make sense. What part of “Dr. Humes probed the back wound and found out that it went at most a couple of inches inside the body you don’t understand…? What else do you need to accept, logically, that this couldn’t have possible been the same bullet than the one that went though the throat…? And then about the location of this wound.

    The photos of the jacket and the shirt clearly show that the back wound was located several inches below the collar and these are far more reliable than the pictures & radiographies supposedly taken during the autopsy, as several of those participating in it have declared later that the radiographies are not the ones they took or that the photos were tampered with or even fabricated or both. As for the picture showing the back wound in the body, all they needed was to pull the body up holding it by the armpits to bunch the back up and take the picture from above looking down to make the wound appear higher than it really was. But in any case there is a simple way anyone will be able to prove that you are dead wrong and that the official version doesn’t reflect reality. Ask you beer buddy to sit normally on a couch and then measure the length of a dollar bill from the collar of his shirt or jacket down his back. From that point draw an imaginary straight line across his chest and falling at 45 to 50 degree. The “exit wound” will result to be located in the mid chest, maybe even lower. You can even move the initial point up towards the collar and even closing in on it you will never get the exit wound in the position of the knot of the tie. That little test and the fact that Humes himself confirmed, like it or not, that those two wounds couldn’t have possibly been caused by the same bullet completely invalidates the official version. You are either incredibly gullible and naïve or just another troll. Ok, enough of you.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  342. @Pâquerette

    Bethesda was chosen by Jackie Kennedy after JFK’s personal physician, Admiral Burkley, gave her a choice between Walter Reed Army Medical Center and Bethesda Naval Medical Center for an autopsy. (The two facilities are now part of the same institution, but they were still separate in 1963.)

    Why did Jackie choose Bethesda? Because her husband Jack, just like James Forrestal, was a former navy man, of course.

    • Replies: @Pâquerette
  343. @ivan

    I read them and answered them six months ago.

    Bertrand Russell was a very old man in 1963. There’s no reason to believe he had any special insight into the events surrounding November 22nd, 1963.

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
    , @ivan
  344. @gatobart

    Anyone with a working brain inside his skull and without any hidden agenda will realize that the official narrative doesn’t make sense. What part of “Dr. Humes probed the back wound and found out that it went at most a couple of inches inside the body you don’t understand…?

    How about the fact NO high-velocity bullet will suddenly stop inside a body for no reason? It it hits bone, it fragments; if it doesn’t hit bone, it goes through the soft tissue to the other side of the body.

    How about the fact that no dissection was performed on the wound that would have traced the path of the bullet? Due to Jackie’s wishes for a speedy and less invasive procedure, the autopsy was incomplete.

    How about the fact that Dr. Humes himself immediately changed his mind about the wound after he spoke with Dr. Perry of Parkland Hospital? Humes immediately understood the significance of the throat wound, which had been obscured by Dr. Perry’s tracheotomy, and changed his opinion about what had happened.

    The photos of the jacket and the shirt clearly show that the back wound was located several inches below the collar and these are far more reliable than the pictures & radiographies supposedly taken during the autopsy, as several of those participating in it have declared later that the radiographies are not the ones they took or that the photos were tampered with or even fabricated or both.

    Complete bullshit. The x-rays and photos have been verified. For such a young man, JFK spent a great deal of time in hospitals before he became president. It’s thus quite easy to compare Kennedy’s X-rays taken before his presidency to those taken during the autopsy. It’s the same man, doofus.

    The HSCA in in the late seventies understood the importance of establishing that the X-rays were of Kennedy and no one else. They brought in a host of experts to make comparisons. They established beyond a doubt that the X-rays were of John F. Kennedy.

    To facilitate the scientific analysis of the photographs and X-rays, the HSCA brought in experts in anthropology, forensic dentistry, photographic interpretation, forensic pathology, and radiology. Anthropologists studied the autopsy photographs to verify that they all depicted one individual, John F. Kennedy, and in particular that the photographs of the rear of the head were consistent with other views in which President Kennedy’s facial features are recognizable. They also did a comparison study of the autopsy X-rays and premortem (i.e., prior to death) X-rays known to have been taken of President Kennedy over several years. The anthropologists focused on a number of anatomic characteristics (including cranial sutures, vascular grooves, and air cells of the mastoid bone) that would enable them to tell if the premortem and autopsy X-rays depicted one or two separate individuals. They concluded that there could be no reasonable doubt that the person depicted in both the autopsy photographs and X-rays was in fact John F. Kennedy and no other person.45 In addition, the committee’s forensic odontologist, Dr. Lowell J. Levine, who was experienced in identifying the victims of unnatural death through dental records, examined premortem X-rays of President Kennedy’s teeth and compared them with those visible in the autopsy X-rays. Dr. Levine concluded, based on the unique positions of the teeth (relative to each other), the shapes and sizes of fillings of the teeth, and a myriad of other anatomic characteristics, that the three autopsy skull X-rays were “unquestionably of the skull of President John F. Kennedy.”

    It’s time for you to grow up and rid yourself of these childish obsessions that have no merit.

  345. S says:
    @Pincher Martin

    Bill Demar, the ventrilquist that Ruby had booked at the Carousel Club at the time of the JFK assassination, was the one who got the claim that Oswald knew Ruby initially going in his interview with Dan Rather. The Carousel strippers, almost down to the last one of them, thought that it was an effort by Demar to cash in on the tragedy and generate publicity for himself and his act, which it certainly did.

    As time went on Demar tended to get vaguer and less certain about his claim.

    One thing that is a fact is that when Oswald shot Tippit he was within a few hundred feet of Ruby’s Oak Cliff apartment, which he had been (roughly) walking towards when he got stopped by the officer. [There are maps of this that can be found on the internet.]

    The thing is, though, there’s a lot of that sort of thing with the JFK assassination.

    Oswald’s older ‘friend’, George de Mohrenschildt, for instance, in November ’63 lived within a mile of Abraham Zapruder in an exclusive Dallas area neighborhood. Jeanne LeGon, Mohrenschildt’s wife, had physically worked side by side with Zapruder for a time (1953-54) in Dallas at a clothing place called Nardi’s. Besides that, George Mohrenschildt knew Jackie Kennedy’s Boviear family, and had met Jackie when she was a child.

    Yes, a lot of very weird ‘seven degrees of Kevin Bacon’ synchronicity smoke in regards to the Kennedy assassination, no question. Yet, finding the actual fire of a proven conspiracy, always seems to elude.

    Getting at the actual truth of the matter has not been helped with the hordes of grifter types that have gravitated to the assassination, wanting to make bank, almost from the beginning.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_de_Mohrenschildt

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  346. @Wielgus

    Well, at least this part is true:

    Considering the amount of explosives on the plane, it is not surprising no remains were found.

    Sure, 10 tons of Torpex detonating right next to/ all around you doesn’t leave much in the way of remains. But the rest of your post is highly-misleading BS.

    In WW2, planes were known to blow up, and experimental secret weapons are dangerous.

    You’re [deliberately?] conflating a several different issues here. It wasn’t a case of the plane mysteriously blowing up — the bomb detonated “prematurely” within a minute or two after it was armed. The “experimental secret weapon” aspect of the Operation Aphrodite was the TV cameras and remote guidance system. The bomb carried by that B-24 did not rely on nitroglycerin, or even gelignite, as a high explosive — it was a Torpex bomb. Constructing, arming, and detonating bombs that relied on TNT, RDX, and combinations of the two [like Torpex] as a high explosive was very much a mature technology at the time that Joe Jr.’s plane inexplicably exploded. Related concepts:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosive_train
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figure_of_Insensitivity
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safety_testing_of_explosives

    B-24s — like the one that Joe Jr. was flying when he was killed — typically carried double-digit numbers of bombs, each with its own detonation system, rather than a single bomb with a single detonation system [like Joe Jr.’s plane]. How many of the 18,500 B-24s used in WW2 were brought down by unexplained “spontaneous” explosions of those bombs? Now express that number as a percentage of missions flown, rather than planes… that‘s your baseline probability.

    It wasn’t even the only plane in the Aphrodite programme that failed, with fatalities among crew.

    More pilpul. Again, the “plane” didn’t fail; it flew just fine. The bomb detonated for no apparent reason. Joe Jr. and Wilford John Willy [his copilot] were the only casualties in Operation Aphrodite that were caused by “premature” detonation of the drone’s bomb.

    All of the other Aphrodite casualties occurred during the bailout phase — parachutes failing to open, loss of [remote] control during bailout, etc. None of the others were caused by ostensible “bomb malfunctions.”

    Did I mention that the chase plane “monitoring” the initial stages of the mission was part of the 325th Reconnaissance Wing, a unit under the command of FDR’s son Elliott Roosevelt?

    And on the subject of Kennedy coincidences… everyone remembers JFK Jr.’s fatal [and entirely accidental] death in a plane crash — but few recall Teddy Kennedy’s near-fatal 1964 crash. He sure voted the “right” way after that, though…

    • Replies: @Wielgus
  347. @Pincher Martin

    Motive is meaningless in assigning guilt to a crime.

    AKA “Known mishpucka Jacob Rubinstein clearly murdered Oswald for the good of the American goyim, and that’s final!”

    Well I don’t know about the rest of the goyim, but I’m convinced…

    lol

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  348. @S

    Bill Demar, the ventrilquist that Ruby had booked at the Carousel Club at the time of the JFK assassination, was the one who got the claim that Oswald knew Ruby initially going in his interview with Dan Rather. The Carousel strippers, almost down to the last one of them, thought that it was an effort by Demar to cash in on the tragedy and generate publicity for himself and his act, which it certainly did.

    Jack Ruby’s seedy life was filled with these kind of strange, low-IQ people who sought public attention for all the wrong reasons. One of the men who immediately threw doubt on DeMar’s claim about Oswald knowing Jack Ruby, for example, was Wally Weston, the master of ceremonies at the Carousel. Yet in 1976 Weston came up with an even stranger story than Bill DeMar had ever claimed:

    Thirteen years later [Weston] told the New York Daily News, in a major exclusive, that Oswald had been in the Carousel “at least twice” before the assassination and was a heckling patron. On one occasion, per Weston, Oswald walked right up to the front of the stage and called Weston “a Communist.” When Weston told Oswald, he, Weston, was an American and to please sit down, Oswald said, “Well, I still think you’re a Communist,” whereupon Weston said he jumped off the stage and slugged Oswald. Oswald landed in Ruby’s arms and Ruby said to Oswald, “You . . . , I told you never to come in here.” Ruby, per Weston, wrestled Oswald to the floor and then threw Oswald down the stairs. Why hadn’t Weston come forward with this sensational story before? He told the News, “Personal safety. So many people connected with it [the assassination] died or disappeared.” But as author Seth Kantor points out, when the FBI interviewed Weston on November 24, 1963 (the time he debunked DeMar’s story), no one had yet “died or disappeared”

    Another man who claimed to see Ruby and Oswald together was William (Robert) Litchfield, a professional bowler and conman who had served hard time for armed robbery and forgery. His story fell apart when he couldn’t pass a polygraph and his witnesses said they remembered him saying he had known Ruby but not Oswald.

    The thing is, though, there’s a lot of that sort of thing with the JFK assassination.

    If you investigate a case as thoroughly and as long as the Kennedy assassination has been investigated, these coincidences will always bubble up to the surface. I live in a major metropolitan area. I have no idea about the backgrounds and professions of most of the people on my street, let alone the thousands of people living within a half-mile radius of my home. If for some reason, I were ever to become connected to a famous crime in any way (either as victim, perp, or patsy), I’m sure that all kinds of weird and usual degrees of separation would pop up to cast suspicion on some element of the crime.

    • Replies: @S
  349. @James Forrestal

    You misunderstand. Motive doesn’t matter. You can hang a man without a coherent and understandable motive for his crime. All you need establish is intent. You then provide the evidence that goes beyond a reasonable doubt that he followed through on that intent.

    To this day, people still argue about Charles Manson’s motives for the murders he orchestrated. They are still unclear. Yet few people think Manson didn’t commit those crimes even if they disagree about his motives.

    So who cares about Ruby’s motive. He clearly explained it on numerous occasions, and yet his explanations don’t make it any more understandable to a sane person than if he had never given any reason for it at all.

    Do I believe his stated motives? Did he really want to save Jackie the pain of going through a trial in Dallas? Did he also want to show that Jews were tough? Sure, it fits with what we know about the emotional and mental state of Ruby.

    But that is not the problem for those who wish to find a conspiracy in Ruby’s actions. The problem they have is not motive, but the lack of evidence.

    • Replies: @James Forrestal
  350. @gatobart

    Some argue that the specific language used in constructing a narrative is often as — or more — important than the ostensible content of that narrative. Let’s take a look at how “gatobart” does this:

    “Lucky Luciano”
    “Sicilian mob”
    “South of the Italy”
    “L.L.” [Lucky Luciano]
    “Al Capone”

    So the obvious implication is that, apart from Jacob Rubinstein, almost all mobsters in America in the 20th century were Italian goyim. According to “gatobart,” anyway…

    Is this long-discredited semitic canard of “Italian goy gangsters only” one that is specific to “gatobart’s” personal misconceptions of the Rubinstein story? Or is it a more widespread trope? Let’s take a look at a more mainstream source of semitic Rubinstein narratives — wikipedia. What do they have to say about Rubinstein’s known connections to organized crime?

    “Ruby had known Chicago mobster Sam Giancana [Italian goy] and Joseph Campisi [Italian goy]”

    “On the night before Kennedy was assassinated, Ruby and Joe Campisi [Italian goy] had dinner together at Campisi’s restaurant, the Egyptian Lounge.[76] After Ruby was jailed for killing Lee Oswald, Joe Campisi “regularly visited” Ruby”

    “Tony Accardo [Italian goy] allegedly asked Jack Ruby to go to Texas with Mafia associates Pat Manno [Italian goy] and Romie Nappi [Italian goy] to make sure that Dallas County Sheriff Steve Gutherie would acquiesce to the “Mafia’s” [organized crime’s] expansion into Dallas”

    ” ‘Mafia’ leaders Carlos Marcello [Italian goy] and Santo Trafficante, Jr. [Italian goy], as well as organized labor leader Jimmy Hoffa [Irish/ German goy], ‘ordered the assassination of President Kennedy’.”

    That last claim comes from a man named (((David Scheim))). And in just in case you might overlook his not-so-subtle assumption that organized crime in America is entirely a Sicilian goy operation — with perhaps the occasional Irish/ German goy here and there — just look at the titles of Sheim’s two books on the subject:
    Contract on America : the “Mafia” murders of John and Robert Kennedy and The “Mafia” Killed President Kennedy.

    Yeah the underlying message is clear here. Rubinstein was a jew mobster, but an extremely goyophilic — specifically Italophilic — one. Clearly he would never dream of associating with, much less listening to, people like Meyer Lansky, or Moe Dalitz, or Sidney Korshak…

    So what did Rubinstein himself have to say about his alleged goyophilia? Well, according to his rabbi, “he said, ‘I did it for the Jewish people’.”

    Strange. Those Italian goy “jewish people,” apparently…

    • Replies: @gatobart
  351. Hughes says:
    @HbutnotG

    The US state department conceive an entire series of research program exactly for the forceful hypnosis and behavior conditioning called MK ULTRA. One of the very first things it delves into is the use of psychotropic chemicals to alter and degrade the subject cognitive capacities so advanced behavior conditioning/hypnosis techniques can be used against them.

  352. S says:
    @Pincher Martin

    If for some reason, I were ever to become connected to a famous crime in any way (either as victim, perp, or patsy), I’m sure that all kinds of weird and usual degrees of separation would pop up to cast suspicion on some element of the crime.

    This is a good and valid point.

    I should correct myself, though Zapruder and Mohrenschildt had indeed once lived relatively close together in Dallas, at the time of the actual assassination, Mohrenschildt was in Haiti.

    Yet in 1976 Weston came up with an even stranger story than Bill DeMar had ever claimed:

    Yes, all somebody has to have is the thinnest connection to the assassination, and a potentially half plausible story, and you’re in the money.

    Interestingly, Geraldo Rivera in 1976 had a Kennedy assassination special . Many of the key people were interviewed live, or on tape, such as Oswald’s mother. Wally Weston gave the story you described and was immediately shut down by Ruby’s sister, saying it was all about money on Weston’s part.

    Ruby, per Weston, wrestled Oswald to the floor and then threw Oswald down the stairs.

    Weston got that part right. Throwing people down the stairs was Ruby’s trademark! 🙂

  353. gatobart says:
    @James Forrestal

    So once again you are back to doing your usual psychoanalyst a dozen a dime bit. And once again I am sinning by not arriving to the “obvious” conclusion that this was the work of the Zionists.

    “Yeah the underlying message is clear here. Rubinstein was a jew mobster, but an extremely goyophilic — specifically Italophilic — ”

    That is not my conclusion, that may be your conclusion or the conclusion you think are of others but you are obviously so obsessed by your own fanaticism that you can’t even see clearly enough to correctly understand what others are writing. I can even picture you as the kind of guy who checks every night under his bed for a Zionist before going to sleep. You are trying to start a fake debate here that you hope will allow you to prove that I am for exposing Italian mobsters (as if Coppola, De Niro, Pacino,. Leone, Tarantino, Scorsese and a crowd of other Italians in films and literature hadn’t done already enough to make them part of our modern culture) while ignoring Jewish contribution to the underworld. Sorry, doc, but you won’t me lure into your phony debate. After all we all know well about Meyer Lansky (which Wikipedia itself describes as a close business associate of, wait for it…Lucky Luciano.); Bugsy Siegel (“founder” of Las Vegas) and other famous names. Furthermore there has never been any attempt by Hollywood or by anyone else to conceal the fact that there had been pretty robust Jewish crime organizations in the USA, not even in movies made by Italians. We see Jewish mobsters in practically every Godfather and Scorsese’s Casino has even a protagonist who is a Jewish gangster. Leone’s Once Upon a Time in America is even dedicated to explore the rise of the Jewish underworld in the US….! And as I mentioned, Lansky and Lucky Luciano had no problem at all doing business together. The Italians and Jewish mobsters interacted and did business in such a tight way that one would think they were all part of the same crime family. So all that “You focus on those poor Italians and try to ignore Jewish contribution to organized crime” is nothing but bullsheet. Such confrontation never existed in the real world and only exists in the dark, delusional world where you live, in which there is a Zionist lurking behind every tree.

    So that Jack Rubinstein could have done a lot of business with Italians in no way makes of him an exception, quite the opposite, almost the norm. BTW, this is the same guy who during the time when Fidel Castro was fighting in the mountains against the Batista dictatorship used to go to Cuba to bring weapons to his rebels, for the mob, expecting of course to get a payback when he would be in power. I don’t think why a right wing extremist and a mobster giving weapons to a Commie could have had any qualms working with Jews in the U.S.

    BTW, the house in which Tony Soprano lived with his family (not that I watched the series, i haven’t watched a single episode) is the property of a nice middle age couple, Victor and Patti Recchia, who put it to the disposal of producers so they could film The Sopranos in it. So much for abusing and badmouthing Italians…!

    • Replies: @James Forrestal
  354. gatobart says:

    My mistake:

    in:

    I don’t think why a right wing extremist and a mobster giving weapons to a Commie could have had any qualms working with Jews in the U.S.

    it should read:

    I don’t think why a right wing extremist (and a Jewish mobster) giving weapons to a Commie could have had any qualms working with Italians in the U.S.

  355. @Pincher Martin

    Russell dead would have more logic and integrity than you. He was still sharp as a scalpel at the time as numerous televised interviews show. Plus he called together a tribunal to investigate the killing full of highly eminent figures from the UK.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  356. ivan says:
    @Pincher Martin

    There is no need to have a special insight , these are are natural questions that would occur to enquiring mind. Russell had his faculties around him till his death in 1970. He wasn’t a doddering old codger.

    My angle though has always been the killing of Oswald by Ruby. That in itself is prima facie evidence of a conspiracy. So we have a “lone nut” Ruby, killing another “lone nut” Oswald. The Dallas police did a heck of a job protecting the “lone nut” Oswald and in that famous picture the man in white looking on while the grimacing Oswald was shot, was like : “Oh my, I hope that didn’t hurt too much!”.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  357. Wielgus says:
    @James Forrestal

    Explosives by their nature are dangerous and are apt to go off at the wrong time. The Port Chicago blast killed hundreds and devastated the port, in exactly the same year, two years earlier an apparent Soviet attempt to kill German ambassador to Turkey Franz von Papen with a bomb failed when it went off prematurely, killing the man carrying it and only knocking von Papen off his feet (detonation just 10 seconds later might have been a different story).
    World War II was quite dangerous. People got killed.
    Added to which, Kennedy’s tour was ending – why did he volunteer for a top secret programme? Was he MK Ultra-ed into taking an extra risk, or more likely, did this member of the “greatest generation” actually believe in what he was doing and wanted to help the war effort? Whatever, no conspiracy made him volunteer for it, unless we conclude that the entire Aphrodite programme was conceived to kill a Kennedy.

    • Replies: @James Forrestal
  358. @Pincher Martin

    Thank you for the detail ! My joke was too serious, I should be more careful.

  359. @Mulga Mumblebrain

    He was sharp for a 90-plus-year-old man. He remained the subject of celebrity interviews where he provided lines he had been saying in amusing fashion for decades. But he had long before given up serious work for leftist political advocacy.

    No more proof of this is needed than that Russell relied on the serially dishonest Mark Lane for his talking points about the Kennedy investigation. This led him astray. Had he been more mentally astute, he might have conducted his own more serious investigation independent of Lane.

    Plus he called together a tribunal to investigate the killing full of highly eminent figures from the UK.

    Tribunal? He rallied a bunch of leftist intellectual celebrities, politicians, and other dilettantes to the cause. That’s it. Then, when he got bored, as he always did at that age, he quickly moved on to other political causes.

    Russell’s sixteen points were dated the moment he published them (which, incidentally, was before the Warren Commission report came out). Your reliance on them is a classic example of appeal to authority in which an intellectual figure, who has no special knowledge of the subject at hand, is nevertheless put forward to prove a case he doesn’t know nearly as well as most of the online idiots today who speak of a conspiracy to kill Kennedy.

  360. @ivan

    There is no need to have a special insight , these are are natural questions that would occur to enquiring mind. Russell had his faculties around him till his death in 1970. He wasn’t a doddering old codger.

    Russell put forward those questions before the Warren Commission was even published. Why? Because he relied on the egregiously-dishonest and politically-motivated Mark Lane for his talking points.

    Those sixteen questions weren’t that remarkable in 1964 when Russell first published them, but some of them at least had some basis for being asked back then, although not much. They have none now.

    As for Russell’s state of mind back then, I provide quotes from Paul Johnson’s Intellectuals.

    Many of Russell’s sayings, from 1960 on, were not merely fervent but outrageous and were often made on the spur of the moment, when he had worked himself up into a state of righteous indignation with those who did not share his views. Thus, for a speech in Birmingham in April 1961, he had prepared notes which read: ‘On a purely statistical basis, Macmillan and Kennedy are about fifty times as wicked as Hitler.’ This was bad enough since (apart from anything else) it was comparing historical fact with futurist projection. But a recording shows that what Russell actually went on to say in his speech was: ‘We used to think Hitler was wicked when he wanted to kill all the Jews. But Kennedy and Macmillan not only want to kill all the Jews but all the rest of us too. They’re much more wicked than Hitler.’ He added: ‘I will not pretend to obey a government which is organizing the massacre of the whole of mankind…They are the wickedest people that ever lived in the history of man.’

    I guess it’s a good thing that Oswald killed JFK. He was actually killing a man “much more wicked” than Hitler.

    There’s more:

    When Russell began to campaign against the H-bomb, his anti-Americanism became totally irrational and remained so until his death. He developed a childish conspiracy-theory about Kennedy’s assassination. Then, tiring of the H-bomb issue – like Tolstoy, Russell’s attention-span was brief – he switched to Vietnam and organized a worldwide campaign of vilification of America’s conduct there….

    When he announced, during the 1962 Cuban missile crisis, ‘It seems likely that within a week you will all be dead to please American madmen,’ he damaged himself, not President Kennedy.50 When he said American soldiers in Vietnam were ‘as bad as Nazis’, his audience dwindled.51

    The sixties for Bertrand Russell was one long shrill political screed filled with the worst leftist political cliches. At least through the first several decades of his life he was less shrill and more intellectually engaged.

    Back to you:

    My angle though has always been the killing of Oswald by Ruby. That in itself is prima facie evidence of a conspiracy. So we have a “lone nut” Ruby, killing another “lone nut” Oswald. The Dallas police did a heck of a job protecting the “lone nut” Oswald and in that famous picture the man in white looking on while the grimacing Oswald was shot, was like : “Oh my, I hope that didn’t hurt too much!”.

    You know what is actual evidence of a conspiracy? Evidence of a conspiracy. It’s not your hunches or statistical outliers (i.e., one lone-nut assassin killing another lone-nut assassin).

    Both the Warren Commission and the HSCA looked into Ruby’s background with a fine-toothed comb. They both came to the conclusion that there was no proof of a conspiracy to kill either Kennedy or Oswald.

    The same goes for those Dallas reporters (minus Seth Kantor) I mentioned earlier. Their professional lives would’ve been secured for life if they had found proof for a conspiracy. But despite looking hard to find evidence for one, they, too, came away empty-handed.

    • Replies: @ivan
  361. @gatobart

    Lol — and “gatobart” spews yet another torrent of logorrheic, confused pilpul, which can be effectively summarized as: “Rubinstein loved the Italian goyim! And he loved America! The only possible motivation for him to murder an American goy would be either his great love for the Italian goyim, or his loyalty to the American goyim! He would never listen to top jew criminals like Sam Bronfman or Louis Friedman! It’s like, obvious! ”

    Kinda strange that he told his rabbi that he killed Oswald “for the jewish people” then, hmm? Guess the Jewish Daily Forward must be one of dem dere “antisemiticist” publications, eh? Since they’re promoting some very carard-like “blood libels” ‘n sheeut…

    Just for fun, let’s see what actual evidence the bartster can cite in support of his ludicrously-improbable assertion that jew mobsters like Rubinstein only interact with Italian goyim in their criminal activities — and that all of their murders are motivated by sheer love for the American goyim and their country:

    An extended riff “explaining” how Jew-adjacent Italians exist, therefore semitic ethnonarcissism somehow cannot.

    An obviously self-refuting logical fallacy. Sad!

    By the way, did top jew mobsters like Sam Bronfman and Louis M. Friedman have any connections to the Zionist settler-colonialist enterprise in Palestine?

    Just curious.

  362. gatobart says:

    You are crazy or you are taking us for imbeciles. So according to your logic, the same Jews that can ‘t be trusted if they were telling us that the night is black and the day is clear suddenly turn into the best, most credible reference, when it comes to confirm your pre-conceived notions and fantasies…! And a rabbi of all people…! Really.

    • Replies: @James Forrestal
  363. @Wielgus

    Explosives by their nature are “dangerous” and are “apt to go off at the wrong time.”

    So clearly you were laboring under the ludicrously-ignorant misconception that the bomb aboard Joe Jr.’s plane was constructed from nitroglycerin or a similarly unstable primary explosive, and persist in mindlessly parroting this long-discredited canard despite my patient, tolerant efforts to slightly ameliorate your gross ignorance. End-stage Dunning-Krugerism is a terrible disease.

    Read the links I posted, dummy.

    The Allied powers dropped a total of 3.4 million tons of bombs during WW2 — well over 10 million individual bombs. You’re clearly unable to cite even a single instance of any other WW2 bomber engaged in level flight at cruising altitude over friendly territory, that was brought down by an allegedly “spontaneous” explosion of one of those millions of bombs… other than Joe Jr.’s.

    Your utter and pathetic failure to do so speaks for itself. Attempting to that this happened “all the time,” when you can’t even cite a single comparable example, is clear evidence of either gross ignorance, deliberate mendacity, or both on your part.

    • Replies: @Wielgus
  364. @gatobart

    Your implicit acknowledgement that high level jew mobsters like Sam Bronfman and Louis M. Friedman were heavily involved in backing the Zionist settler-colonialist enterprise in Palestine is appreciated. At least you’ve given up on your patently-nonsensical claim that mishpuckas are invariably motivated to kill by their allegedly boundless love for the Italian goyim and/ or American goyim. That was a pretty silly “argument.”

    So you do believe that the Jewish Daily Forward is secretly run by a cabal of goy “antisemiticists?” Interesting.

    Unlike you, I’m a very tolerant, understanding person, so I’ll try to compensate for your cognitively-crippled condition. It’s clear from your latest confused whimpering that you completely fail to understand a couple of very basic concepts. You might wish to take the opportunity to read up on these:

    1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

    2. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/admission_against_interest

    You’re welcome.

    • Replies: @gatobart
  365. @Pincher Martin

    So who cares about Ruby’s motive.

    Exactly. Either:

    1. Rubinstein — a known mishpucka — clearly killed Oswald out of his sheer love for the American goyim

    2. Italian goy mobsters ordered him to kill Oswald, or

    3. It doesn’t really matter why a jewish mobster killed Oswald — who cares? Just ignore the issue.

    Any one of these is a perfectly acceptable hypothesis, but any other possibility is clearly heresy, and should be aggressively suppressed. Excellent point.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  366. @James Forrestal

    Exactly. Either:

    Or, it does not matter what a crazy person’s motive is since no possible motive is ever likely to make sense to a normal person.

    For example, John Hinckley shot Ronald Reagan because he wanted to capture the attention of a young Hollywood actress. That makes no sense to me or probably to any other sane person as a possible motive. Yet indeed that is what apparently motivated Hinckley to try to and take Reagan’s life.

    Similarly, Ruby’s stated motive – that he wanted to save Jackie from the need to travel to Dallas for a trial – makes little sense to any sane person. What grown man would love a politician to such a degree in a free society?

    Yet witness after witness after witness testified to Ruby’s excessive adoration of JFK. Even the reporter Seth Kantor, who believes a conspiracy existed to pressure Ruby into killing Oswald, does not deny that Ruby was irrationally in love with Kennedy. (See the following video beginning with 13:00)

    It doesn’t really matter why a jewish mobster killed Oswald…

    Point of order: Ruby was not a Jewish mobster. He was a nightclub owner with tenuous (but real) ties to the underworld.

  367. ivan says:
    @Pincher Martin

    You are being utterly ridiculous here. I don’t have to read anything else to know that when he called Kennedy and MacMillan more wicked “statistically” than AH he was referring either to the Cuban missile crisis or to the development of the Hydrogen bomb, and the number of deaths to be expected in a nuclear exchange.

    And it is just as ridiculous for you to maintain that Dallas reporters risked their lives and careers, to cover a possible link between Oswald and Ruby, when in fact according to do you they did the same and survived without Ill effects.

    The “integrity” or lack of it of
    a section of American journalists is well-known. There is in the libraries today three or four books by them or their confreres pushing the line that Donald Trump is a Russian asset when in fact he is no such thing.

    There was an article by Ron Unz about some monster activity where he wrote that Earl Warren was complicit in the forced disposition of the assets of the Japanese Americans. He was no Dorothy Day. While according to you he tried to “shield” Mrs Kennedy and therefore merits our admiration. Was it his job to “shield” various parties or to uncover the truth?

    From what I read which may be wrong, Ruby claimed to be so distraught at the thought of the Kennedy children growing up without a father, that he took it upon himself to kill Oswald as just punishment. So we have another guy here working in the best interests of the Kennedys. That he knocked off Oswald who could have helped with the investigations was sheer coincidence.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  368. @ivan

    You are being utterly ridiculous here. I don’t have to read anything else to know that when he called Kennedy and MacMillan more wicked “statistically” than AH he was referring either to the Cuban missile crisis or to the development of the Hydrogen bomb, and the number of deaths to be expected in a nuclear exchange.

    If you know what Bertrand Russell means by that passage, then you should know that it is Russell who is being “utterly ridiculous.”

    Is FDR “much more wicked” than Genghis Khan because the former led a state which had the military potential to actually accomplish what the Mongol leader could not in conquering Japan?

    Ascribing an evil moral calculus to what is nothing more than an advanced technological military capacity shows the lack of clear thinking that Russell increasingly fell prey to in his dotage.

    Kennedy and MacMillan did not “want to kill everyone.” They were not “much more wicked” than Hitler. They were not the “wickedest people” in the history of the world. They were only more capable of doing greater damage. Possessing a greater technological military capacity does not equal – nor even imply – a more evil nature. But that’s the kind of stupid thinking and rhetorical overkill that Bertrand Russell began to employ with great frequency in the nineteen-sixties.

    And it is just as ridiculous for you to maintain that Dallas reporters risked their lives and careers, to cover a possible link between Oswald and Ruby, when in fact according to do you they did the same and survived without Ill effects.

    Who said anything about those journalists risking their lives? I said that they all worked hard to find a conspiracy in Dallas because the evidence for one would’ve made them famous in the same way that Bernstein and Woodward later became famous in the nineteen-seventies for exposing Nixon’s coverup of Watergate.

    You don’t have to take my word for that. You can ask those Dallas reporters at the time who admitted to working overtime to find some connection between Oswald and Ruby – or between Ruby and the mob. The only one who succeeded by his own lights was Seth Kantor, and most readers of his work feel his research doesn’t support his thesis.

    The “integrity” or lack of it of a section of American journalists is well-known. There is in the libraries today three or four books by them or their confreres pushing the line that Donald Trump is a Russian asset when in fact he is no such thing.

    Yes, but in that case the journalists’ political interest matched with what they wanted to find. They wanted to find garbage on Trump.

    That was not the case with JFK, who was perhaps more beloved by reporters than any other American president. Even in Dallas. So reporters would’ve been motivated to find a conspiracy, both for political and professional reasons.

    There was an article by Ron Unz about some monster activity where he wrote that Earl Warren was complicit in the forced disposition of the assets of the Japanese Americans. He was no Dorothy Day. While according to you he tried to “shield” Mrs Kennedy and therefore merits our admiration. Was it his job to “shield” various parties or to uncover the truth?

    I didn’t say Warren deserved our admiration for his decisions on the Warren Commission. I said that most of those decisions were understandable and obviously not done for nefarious reasons, even if in hindsight we know they were mistaken. He was not part of a conspiracy to hide the truth, which is how most wingnuts today portray him. Like most reporters, Earl Warren loved Kennedy and his politics, despite the two men being in opposite parties.

    Earl Warren made many mistakes during his chairmanship of the commission. I mentioned some of them earlier in the thread. But even the staff lawyers who worked under Warren, and were often frustrated by his decisions, thought he made most of them for understandable reasons. But they vehemently disagreed with the following decisions by Warren.

    1) Warren decided not to allow his staff lawyers to see the autopsy photos and X-rays. This was a huge mistake. But he did it because Robert Kennedy was against it, fearing (probably correctly) that once the Warren Commission’s lawyers had their hands on them, they would be inevitably leaked. Kennedy and Warren didn’t want that graphic evidence circulating in public.

    2) Warren did not want to interview either Robert Kennedy or Jackie Kennedy at length. (Nor did the commission interview LBJ.) Another huge mistake by Warren that the staff lawyers fought against.

    In Jackie’s case, she was given a cursory interview, even though Earl Warren knew that she was speaking to the author William Manchester at length about what had happened that day. Warren was originally against interviewing Jackie at all, but one of the commissioners, John McCloy, complained to Warren that it wouldn’t be right for the commission to not interview Jackie when everyone knew she was talking at length about the assassination to the family-picked author of a family-sanctioned book on the events in Dallas.

    As for Bobby Kennedy, he was allowed to write in his answers about his role, which he delayed doing until the last minute.

    3) Earl Warren turned down the staff’s request to fly Sylvia Duran, who had met Oswald in the Cuban embassy in Mexico City, to the U.S. for questioning. Duran had been roughly questioned by Mexican authorities and the Warren Commission lawyers thought she might have important details to reveal if she was in a safe place for an interview. But Warren didn’t trust anything a Castro-supporting commie and turned the request down.

    From what I read which may be wrong, Ruby claimed to be so distraught at the thought of the Kennedy children growing up without a father, that he took it upon himself to kill Oswald as just punishment. So we have another guy here working in the best interests of the Kennedys. That he knocked off Oswald who could have helped with the investigations was sheer coincidence.

    How could Oswald have helped in the investigations? Neither he nor his wife Marina could be compelled under Texas law to testify once he was charged with the crime.

    In fact, once Oswald was killed, we discovered many damning things about him from Marina that we would have never heard about had he lived.

    And, yes, Ruby was greatly distraught by Kennedy’s death, but his most-oft-stated reason for killing Oswald was to prevent Jackie from having to travel back to Dallas for a trial. He thought that killing Oswald would make him a hero.

    • Replies: @ivan
  369. gatobart says:
    @James Forrestal

    Unlike you, I’m a very tolerant, understanding person, so I’ll try to compensate for your cognitively-crippled condition.

    No, you are just a lunatic lost in his own delusional world. I am trying to complete here a picture of the mechanics of the Dealey Plaza operation of the 22 of November of 1963 and other relevants events and questions of that day (for ex: where exactly was LHO at 12:30? Did he really kill Sgt. Tippit? What was he exactly doing in the Texas theater?) and the last thing I need is some random fruitcake sabotaging my effort, interrupting me and demanding me to waste my time dealing with HIS crisis of paranoia.

  370. ivan says:
    @Pincher Martin

    Thank you. I am at the end of my Latin for now. One hell of a chivalrous guy that Ruby. Who knew that a fellow who ran strippers and guns, was in the end a knight errand in the service of M’ Lady Jacqueline K.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  371. @bayviking

    “They all tend to peddle a favorite narrow storyline some involving Johnson or Mossad”

    The Final Judgement by Michael Collins Piper did what had NOT been done. Made the superiour case for Mossad. It´s free online and a must read.

    Only the Jew won World War II. Don´t think for a second they were about to let some catholic poster boy prevent them from getting the bomb. Might is right, is the filosophy.

  372. Max Payne says:

    “I didn’t even know Palestinians went that far out in the 60s”
    -Most Palestinians I talk to about Sirhan.

  373. Wielgus says:
    @James Forrestal

    Gosh. You seem… upset.
    I might have thought JFK and RFK were murdered by conspiracies, but when people are determined to regard even a Kennedy death in WW2 as suspicious, a war in which thousands were killed by explosives almost every day, and are moreover quite rude when someone brings this up, all I can conclude is that you really are a conspiracy loon.

  374. gatobart says:

    What some people has failed to notice, specially the loonies fixated on a single particular guilty part, usually their favorite villains, is that in those schemes they peddle (specially if the “culprit” were the Zionists) is that in that particular plot the killing of Oswald by Ruby makes absolutely no sense whatsoever and the only way that could have happened is that their entire leadership had suddenly gone crazy. Now, if you wan to analyse in an informed, intelligent way the case, specially concerning the killing of LHO, the convenient thing to do is to analyze how his behavior, his demeanor, changed from the minutes immediately after the shooting in Plaza Dealey until the moment he is shot down in the basement of the police in Dallas, taking specially into account that the organizers of the entire operation had to be informed moment to moment about him:

    a) Four people crossed paths with LHO in the three minutes after the shooting: Officer Marrion Baker and Roy Truly in the second floor of the TSBD. Also a female office worker in the same floor and finally a journalist who asked him where to find a pay phone when he was exiting the building. All four declared he looked calm and collected, despite de circumstances, and showed no reaction even when told that there have been shots fired against the motorcade. He said later he thought they were just fireworks.

    b) Barely 25 minutes later, when he arrives to his rooming house in Oak Cliff the landlady describes him as agitated, even frantic and in a great hurry. Something had to happen in between.

    c) Later, when he is about to be arrested in the Texas Theater he reacts violently, witnesses said he even pulled a gun and tried to shot a cop but the bullet wouldn’t fire. There is also a picture of him still resisting arrest when they have him already out of the building.

    d) At the police HQ he is said to have behaved somewhat calmer, even cocky, sure of himself (now he seems to be reassured that the cops weren’t going to kill him) like all this unpleasantness is more an inconvenience than anything else, something that will be solved with time.

    e) As the elements of proof, true or false, against him keep accumulating and no help is coming from anywhere, he starts acting more worried and he may then start suspecting he has been the victim of a framing by people he considered his friends. Who this people are…? He shows this change in his mood when he openly declares to have been just a patsy in front of journalists.

    f) Probably the best evidence of his recognition of his new situation is when he starts trying to contact John Jacob Abt in the Nord Est, an attorney known for his defense of Leftists. This is a very important development because it marks the recognition by LHO that he will be facing the regular process of an accused of a crime in front of a Court and in some way calms him because he is now more or less sure that the authorities are not accomplices of his framing, that he was just delivered to them by his treacherous “pals”. As the young man educated and smart he is he has come to recognize that all he has to do now is to get a defense attorney. Needless to say, he won’t say anything more in public, let alone leak any information to the media, as he knows that anything he knows of a plot and about the real killers could be used by his counsel as part of a plea bargaining. Many fail to recognize this fact, that Oswald wasn’t about to say anything until formally accused and having to prepare his defense. This takes us to the police basement the 24th.

    g)as said, when LHO was taking his last steps in this world, going from his cell to the wagon that would take him to the county jail, he wasn’t afraid anymore of what local authorities, specially the police, could do to him, as if that had been their intention they would have done it during or after his arrest. So he sees himself now as the proverbial wrongly accused man who must prove his innocence in Court. But he still has a fear, that his “pals” could try to do him in, and that is why before going to the basement he asks for a change in clothes, in case “someone tries to take a potshot at him”. So he is clearly referring yo someone who is NOT an authority and could only reach him at a distance.

    Now, all this is true and confirmed by facts. And this proves also that, if the JFK assassination had been in fact an operation directed “from above” i.e. planned/directed/controlled by very powerful people (as people capable of making the Military, the WH, the FBI, the Dallas and Texas authorities, the Secret Service, the medical personnel in Parkland do their biding) there is no way these people would have included as part of the plan the sending of a two bit local gangster to kill LHO in front of the world press…! Let alone the Zionists…! That is why the “theory” by lunatics like this one here are unworthy of any attention. If the Zionists are THAT powerful, why did they need to kill him in the open, with such urgency and mayhem, when they could have easily done an “Epstein” to him in all calm and tranquility, in the days or weeks after, away from the flashes of the cameras of the media, that of course if they had taken absolute power after killing Kennedy, as they (the loons) pretend this was a Zionist coup. But even more ridiculous is that these same Zionist that hold such big hold over society couldn’t find any Gentile of the many they control, to do this job and had to send one of their own, a Jew..! to do the dirty job and so expose their kind to an entire world audience when they had absolutely no need to for such a thing…! That is why someone has to be extremely blinded by his own fanaticism, not to mention his stupidity, to pretend that this was a Zionist plot and that Ruby was 100% part of it. In fact such is an stupid assumption is we pretend this was a big conspiracy of ANY sort for the simple reason that in that case the powerful people engineering it all would have always found a way to get rid of Oswald as they were able to do with Epstein almost 60 years later. Just pour something in the guards’ coffee and they’ll find when waking up that the guy had committed suicide. No, instead of that, what they did was to force one of their own, another Jew…! to do it and expose him to the word as an assassin. See, that is why there is no point in taking seriously lunatics like this one. In the real world, everything points to this option: that the killing of LHO wasn’t part of the plan and that happened only because the most vulnerable and more exposed members of the conspiracy were terrified of him being alive and able to talk. And who they were…? obviously the king’s fools, the tools, the pawns, the foot soldiers.

    • Replies: @Patrick McNally
  375. @gatobart

    This is really just a shadow of an argument, but it raises just enough points which I personally think should be clarified. There is, of course, a myth which sometimes gets bounced around on boards like this, to the effect that a cabal of the Learned Elders of Zion has been secretly controlling the West (or even the entire world) for at least 2 centuries or more now. If someone believes a fantasy like that then I would say that you’re correct that the JFK-assassination makes no sense in the form in which it happened. If this fantasy were true then you would think that JFK must have been cleared by the Rothschilds before getting into office, in which case what’s the big problem? But of course that’s all BS.

    One common claim that gets circulated in such circles which promote this fantasy is that Samuel Untermeyer’s formal declaration of war on Germany of August 7, 1033, issued in the name of global Judea, was somehow the secret cause of WWII. That’s absurd. If Hitler had simply shown patience in abiding by the Munich Agreement, without occupying Czechoslovakia in March 1939, then he would have been given a sympathetic ear over Danzig by Chamberlain. There would have been no British guarantee to of unconditional support to Poland, the latter would have been pressured to reach accomodations with Germany over the Danzig Corridor, and Roosevelt would simply have had to accept this.

    Hitler occupied Czechoslovakia in March 1939 not simply out of concern for disturbances but because he had always been committed to a drive to the east for living space and he saw that Chamberlain was trying to box him in with agreements that would limit his future ability to stake out his true ambitions as enunciated in Mein Kampf and elsewhere. Without this aspect of Hitler’s own agenda in force it would have been impossible for people like Samuel Untermeyer to do much about promoting a war against the Third Reich. But there’s no question that as a consequence of WWII the influence of organized Anglo-American Jewry grew significantly.

    That in turn led to the founding of Israel. Even here though there was a lot of tension going on in the background. Harry Truman was persuaded to give his support to Israel. But he encountered strong opposition from within his own administration. Most obviously from James Forrestal, but even from George Marshall. Between the time of 1948-63 the Israel lobby was hard at work building up a cohesive political force, but was still not anything like the widely seen center of power which they have been for the last half-century.

    When arguing about whether or not it would make sense to let someone of Jewish stock like Jack Ruby get anywhere near Oswald one shouldn’t impose the standards of today on yesteryear. Most people would have been barely aware of there even existing any sort of Jewish presence in crime and politics back then. This wasn’t just because of secrecy but because the Jewish lobby of that time in 1963 really was smaller and easier to overlook.

    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @gatobart
  376. bayviking says:
    @Pincher Martin

    You have mixed up JFK with RFK. The bullet hole in JFK’s back was superficial . It might account for the bullet found on the gurney, though its too late to ever know for sure. JFK’s body should be exhumed, a standard procedure for resolving outstanding questions in murder cases.

    The evidence for multiple shooters in both cases is overwhelming. The main purpose for murdering RFK was to prevent the JFK case from being reopened.

    The Warren Report was a hack job, concerned with preventing WWIII and protecting the reputation of the CIA and FBI and the careers of Helms and Hoover. One lone gunman served that purpose, but only after he was silenced. The magic bullet theory is preposterous. Connolly never believed it.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  377. @ivan

    I’ve been trying to tell you fellows for the last couple of days that it’s a waste of time to worry about motive.

    I said “motive is meaningless in assigning guilt to a crime.”

    I asked “Who cares about Ruby’s motive” and that the problem conspiracists have with Ruby’s explanation is “not motive, but the lack of evidence [for a conspiracy].”

    I then brought up another famous shooting case a president, John Hinckley’s attempt to murder Reagan in 1981, and pointed out that Hinckley’s motive for that crime, winning the attention a young Hollywood actress, “makes no sense to me or probably to any other sane person as a possible motive.”. And yet that is apparently what motivated him to shoot President Reagan.

    You guys spend too much time on motive. Work the evidence. There’s a reason that Ruby’s own defense team used a novel insanity defense at his trial. It failed for legal reasons, but most people who knew Ruby believed he wasn’t right in the head.

    • Replies: @bayviking
    , @ivan
  378. @bayviking

    The bullet hole in JFK’s back was superficial.

    No, it wasn’t. Try to keep up with my posts. I’ve already explained to gatobart here, here, and here why that is wrong.

    It might account for the bullet found on the gurney, though its too late to ever know for sure.

    High-velocity rounds don’t make superficial entry wounds to soft flesh and then fall out.

    The evidence for multiple shooters in both cases is overwhelming.

    No, it’s not. There’s no hard evidence that any other weapon was fired that day in Dealey Plaza other than Oswald’s rifle. No rounds or bullet fragmentation could be traced to any other weapon other than Oswald’s. Both rounds which caused wounds on either Kennedy alone or Kennedy and Connelly together were fired from the back and above, which was the location where Oswald’s rifle was found. The autopsy and X-rays confirmed that finding.

    The main purpose for murdering RFK was to prevent the JFK case from being reopened.

    Lots of laughs. Robert Kennedy was probably the biggest obstacle to a thorough investigation being done in the first place. He blocked it at nearly every opportunity.

    And since he almost certainly was not going to win in 1968 if no attempt had been made on his life, since even RFK’s own campaign knew he was far behind Humphrey in the race for delegates, there was no point to killing him.

    The magic bullet theory is preposterous. Connolly never believed it.

    Yes, but gunshot victims are rarely the best eyewitnesses. Connelly and his wife Nellie argued over many details of what happened that day. Jackie could not remember trying to crawl out of the car after her husband’s head was blown off. Etc.

    The evidence for a single bullet coming from behind and hitting Connelly’s body after going through Kennedy’s throat is on Connelly’s body. The bullet was tumbling sideways when it entered Connell’s back, which it would not have done if it hadn’t hit something else first.

    • Replies: @gatobart
  379. gatobart says:
    @Patrick McNally

    “This is really just a shadow of an argument”

    Just a shadow but good enough to prove that the LHO killing by Jack Ruby by order of the “powerful Zionist kabbalah who was behind Plaza Dealey” makes absolutely no sense, which was its purpose. As for this powerful Zionist kabbalah in the U.S. and the West in general it has always intrigued me why, powerful as it was, it had been unable for ages to even make the dominant Anglo Saxon elite to accept Jews in their exclusive golf courses…!

    “Most people would have been barely aware of there even existing any sort of Jewish presence in crime and politics back then”.

    As for allowing or not Ruby anywhere near Oswald after Plaza Dealey this doesn’t have to do with how much of a high profile the Jews had at that moment in U.S. society or the public awareness that there had been Jewish crime organizations active for quite some time already, but with the simple fact that whatever organizations existed at the time, specially if criminal ones, the LAST thing their leaders or elders would have wanted is to have one of their own involved in any way in the crime of the century, no matter how idealistic the reasons Ruby used to explain his gesture. If his act of going to the police HQ and kill LHO wasn’t the fruit of a spontaneous impulse and had its origin in his involvement with a group of conspirators, as it was most likely the case, this group couldn’t have been associated, at least for this purpose, with any Jewish organization, national or international.

  380. bayviking says:
    @Pincher Martin

    For decades the Jewish Jack Ruby ran guns into Cuba and Israel, mostly Israel. A lifelong mobster and associate of Carlos Marcello. Ruby met with patsy Lee Harvey Oswald before the JFK assassination. Oswald’s gun was a crude instrument never accurately traced to all recovered bullets. Even if Oswald had attempted to kill Kennedy, which is possibility, the Zapruder film unequivocally proves the fatal shot cam from the front, which blew JFK’s head clean off, at the same time throwing him back and towards Jackie who was covered in some of the splatter. The bigger chunks fell on the trunk of JFK’s limo or on the road and lawn, where it was discovered later. It makes absolutely no sense to pretend that shot same from the depository since there was never any JFK blood found on the dashboard or passenger compartment of the vehicle. Two bullets were recovered in the passenger compartment long after the assassination, bloodless and badly damaged. Another bullet hole in the limo windshield disappeared overnight, leading to widespread belief in a cover-up. The notion that one bullet entered JFK’s back, exited his throat and then took a sharp left into Connolly’s shoulder, wrist and chest is absurd.

    We know Ruby shot Oswald.
    We know Ruby was a lifelong mobster with ties to Carlos Marcello and others.
    We know the RFK had initiated a campaign against the mob, which landed Carlos Marcello in prison, not for any mobster activity, but for tampering with a jury during one of RFK’s prosecutions. Marcello bribed one jurist to vote not guilty and then failed to pay the promised amount, which led to the jurist going public.
    We know J Edgar Hoover denied that organized crime operated a national syndicate and that is exactly what Lansky created.
    We know JFK wanted a balanced foreign policy, which respected the territorial rights of Israelis and Arabs.
    We know JFK considered a matter of highest priority to impose non-proliferation of nuclear weapons on all non-nuclear nations with a long term goal of eliminating nuclear weapons altogether.
    We know Israel was secretly developing atomic weapons and succeeded in doing so.
    We know when JFK was President Israel’s support from the USA was limited to food and infrastructure development.
    We know that in 1966 LBJ and Congress provided more foreign aid to Israel than they had received since their creation in 1947. We also know that the bulk of that money was committed to the purchase of US weapons of mass destruction.
    We have a confession on tape from Carlos Marcello that he conspired to kill JFK, obtained through a bug in his transistor radio in his prison cell.
    We have the testimony from their attorneys after they died that Santos Trafficante and Johnny Rosselli also admitted to being part of a conspiracy to murder JFK.
    We know that 9 people died before giving testimony under subpoena to the Federal Government, regarding the assassination of JFK. Rosselli showed up in a fifty gallon barrel off the coast of Florida. While some of these deaths could have been natural causes several were clearly gangland murders.
    We also know that the three mobster conspirators had been hired by the CIA to kill Castro, without JFK’s direct knowledge. This was the most important reason why Helms never wanted and resisted a thorough investigation.
    It is also suspected that J Edgar Hoover was being blackmailed by the mob, more specifically Myer Lansky, which is why he denied the existence of a national crime syndicate. This is also why Hoover desired that Lee Harvey Oswald was determined to be the only killer, acting alone.
    We also know that the greatest beneficiary of JFK’s death was Israel.

  381. Sparkon says:

    Sparkon is relying on Lifton’s purposeful misreading of the two FBI agents’ report who were present at the autopsy. Lifton fabricates his entire theory based primarily on that misreading.

    You’re making things up. I made no mention of Lifton in my comment #327.

    However, I did cite FD 302, the report from FBI agents O’Niel and Sibert, which is clear and unambiguous in its language:

    This opening was probed by Dr. HUMES with the finger, at which time it was determined that the trajectory of the missile entering at this point had entered at a downward position of 45 to 60 degrees. Further probing determined that the distance travelled by this missile was a short distance inasmuch as the end of the opening could be felt with the finger.

    The wound in JFK’s back was shallow with no exit.

    Any “purposeful misreading” is all yours.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  382. ivan says:
    @Pincher Martin

    Do you understand the difference between a planned assassination of a sitting President and the subsequent knocking off of the same assassin? Hinckley may have an odd motivation but did anyone try to kill him within 24 hours to save Mrs Reagan from distress?

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  383. gatobart says:
    @Pincher Martin

    So still bullsheeting, aren’t we..? See, this is why I don’t waste my time with “LHO did it alone; loonies and I don’t waste it either with “We Went To The Moon wackos, simply because they will accept ONLY as arguments those they think prove their cases and will refuse all those contradicting their fantasies, no matter how solid and indisputable they may be. That way Humes may well have stuck his own finger in the back wound and found out that there was solid muscle only one or two inches inside, but that is a fact that has to be cropped out of the narrative because then, how could they keep on with their lie that this was the entry wound for the exit through the neck…? Impossible, even more so when this back wound was in a 45 to 60 degree angle and located inches lower than the other wound…! That is quite a trip upward the chest that magic bullet would have had to take to win the six or seven inches needed to reach the windpipe.

    But that is not the peak, or rather bottom, when it comes to their in your face intellectual dishonesty, they habit of denying evident facts that obliterate their narrative. Here is another bottom:

    “There’s no hard evidence that any other weapon was fired that day in Dealey Plaza other than Oswald’s rifle. No rounds or bullet fragmentation could be traced to any other weapon other than Oswald’s”

    That is a blatant lie. There is at least one piece of indisputable evidence given by the laws of Physics that proves that at least two kind of rifles were used for the wound in the neck, not to mention the one on the back, and the last one. The last one, the killer shot, to make sure he would be killed and not just wounded, the insurance if you may call it, was without a doubt fired with a high powered rifle and using a bullet capable of blowing almost half of his skull. This is proven by the Harper Bone, a piece of JFK’s skull that was found by a College student a few meters from where the limousine was located at the time of this shot. There is no way the low energy bullet that provoked the back wound could have been caused by the same weapon, let alone the fact that one came from the front and the other one from behind…! And the same can be said of the neck wound. So another example of your usual WC fan blatantly lying.

    “gunshot victims are rarely the best eyewitnesses. Connelly and his wife Nellie argued over many details of what happened that day.”

    Connelly was sure that the bullet that hit Kennedy wasn’t the one that hit him NOT because he was confused by the event but because he remembered all too well that he was able to hear the first shot, the one wounding JFK, and that had made him try to turn around to see the back of the car and that was at that moment when he was hit himself. This is even seen in the Zapruder film where Kennedy has risen his elbow in an instinctive reaction to being shot…already when the limousine reappears behind the traffic sign and Connelly is still sitting upright on his seat and he reacts to being shot only a moment later. Connelly ‘s reaction to being shot is even more obvious than that of JFK. But of course all that evidence will never be enough to make fans of the official narrative stop lying.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  384. @bayviking

    Your biography of Ruby is rubbish. He was not a mobster. The well-known fact that Ruby knew some mobsters does not connect the Dallas nightclub owner to their crimes, any more than Ruby knowing almost every policeman in Dallas made him a cop.

    Even if Oswald had attempted to kill Kennedy, which is possibility, the Zapruder film unequivocally proves the fatal shot cam from the front, which blew JFK’s head clean off, at the same time throwing him back and towards Jackie who was covered in some of the splatter.

    Not one word of this is true. NOT ONE WORD. Analysis of the gunshot splatter shows it blowing forward of Kennedy, not behind him.

    As for the photographic evidence taken from the Zapruder film, it shows the opposite of what you claim. Pay particular attention to Cecil Kirk’s testimony starting at the 5:00 mark.

    And look at the high-contrast photo made by the HSCA experts which Kirk shows at 6:19. The “particulate matter” from Kennedy’s head wound is flying forward, not backward.

    Two bullets were recovered in the passenger compartment long after the assassination, bloodless and badly damaged.

    Wrong again.

    Several “fragments” were found in the car. The so-called pristine bullet, which was actually flattened and slightly deformed at the base, was found either on or nearby Connally’s stretcher at Parkland Hospital. All of them which were large enough to be analyzed were proved to have been fired by Oswald’s rifle to the exclusion of all other weapons in the world.

    Another bullet hole in the limo windshield disappeared overnight, leading to widespread belief in a cover-up.

    Complete bullshit.

    The notion that one bullet entered JFK’s back, exited his throat and then took a sharp left into Connolly’s shoulder, wrist and chest is absurd.

    It is the only thing that makes sense when describing the wounds on all the men and the condition of the bullet.

    1) The bullet enters Kennedy’s upper back traveling at approximately 2,000 feet per second and exits his throat.

    2) It hits no bone and therefore goes cleanly through Kennedy’s body without fragmenting.

    3) But Kennedy’s soft tissue still affects the trajectory of the bullet. It begins to tumble on a downward trajectory.

    4) As it tumbles, the bullet strikes Connally in the back. We know that for a fact because for years afterwards anyone who bothered to inspect Connally’s wound could see it was not a direct strike, but went into his body sideways.

    In his book Unnatural Causes, the forensic pathologist Michael Baden writes about asking the former governor to take off his shirt in 1978 to help with the HSCA investigation. Baden discovered at that time a two-inch long scar on the governor’s back. The only explanation for that type of scar was that the bullet was already tumbling when it struck the governor, and the only explanation for a tumbling bullet is because it first hit something else before striking Connally.

    5) The tumbling bullet continues through Connally’s body, eventually hitting his lower ribs. The lower ribs are not particularly large or hard and would not have damaged the bullet significantly, but deflected it slightly before the bullet exited Connally’s front chest below his right nipple. The bullet then re-entered Connally’s body at the back of his right wrist, exited the other side, before causing a superficial wound on his right thigh.

    6) At each stage, the bullet’s velocity was slowed, as would be expected when it encounters any resistance.

    – Muzzle velocity of Mannlicher-Carcano – 2,296 feet per second.

    – FBI estimate of of the speed of the bullet when it hit Kennedy – 1,900 feet per second.

    – When the bullet Connally’s back – 1,800 feet per second.

    – After hitting Connally’s ribs – 1,400 feet per second.

    – After hitting Connally’s wrist – around 1,200 feet per second.

    Why is this important? Because this reduced velocity, along with the tumbling, explains why the bullet was in relatively good shape when it was found. A slower bullet will not be damaged as much as a faster bullet.

    It also explains why the test bullets the Warren Commission had fired directly into bone were more mangled than the so-called “pristine bullet.”

    https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fhistory-matters.com%2Fessays%2Fjfkmed%2FBigLieSmallWound%2Fsbt.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

    BTW, you guys like to talk about what a couple of doctors at Parkland thought about Kennedy’s wounds. But all three attending surgeons and their attendants thought Connally’s wounds were caused by one bullet. And they spent far more time with Connally’s body than any of the Parkland doctors spent with Kennedy’s

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  385. @bayviking

    BTW, Bay Viking, I didn’t even get a chance to get the second half of your post. But the following is all bullshit other than the first sentence where you write that “We know that Ruby shot Oswald.”

    We know Ruby shot Oswald.
    We know Ruby was a lifelong mobster with ties to Carlos Marcello and others.
    We know the RFK had initiated a campaign against the mob, which landed Carlos Marcello in prison, not for any mobster activity, but for tampering with a jury during one of RFK’s prosecutions. Marcello bribed one jurist to vote not guilty and then failed to pay the promised amount, which led to the jurist going public.
    We know J Edgar Hoover denied that organized crime operated a national syndicate and that is exactly what Lansky created.
    We know JFK wanted a balanced foreign policy, which respected the territorial rights of Israelis and Arabs.
    We know JFK considered a matter of highest priority to impose non-proliferation of nuclear weapons on all non-nuclear nations with a long term goal of eliminating nuclear weapons altogether.
    We know Israel was secretly developing atomic weapons and succeeded in doing so.
    We know when JFK was President Israel’s support from the USA was limited to food and infrastructure development.
    We know that in 1966 LBJ and Congress provided more foreign aid to Israel than they had received since their creation in 1947. We also know that the bulk of that money was committed to the purchase of US weapons of mass destruction.
    We have a confession on tape from Carlos Marcello that he conspired to kill JFK, obtained through a bug in his transistor radio in his prison cell.
    We have the testimony from their attorneys after they died that Santos Trafficante and Johnny Rosselli also admitted to being part of a conspiracy to murder JFK.
    We know that 9 people died before giving testimony under subpoena to the Federal Government, regarding the assassination of JFK. Rosselli showed up in a fifty gallon barrel off the coast of Florida. While some of these deaths could have been natural causes several were clearly gangland murders.
    We also know that the three mobster conspirators had been hired by the CIA to kill Castro, without JFK’s direct knowledge. This was the most important reason why Helms never wanted and resisted a thorough investigation.
    It is also suspected that J Edgar Hoover was being blackmailed by the mob, more specifically Myer Lansky, which is why he denied the existence of a national crime syndicate. This is also why Hoover desired that Lee Harvey Oswald was determined to be the only killer, acting alone.
    We also know that the greatest beneficiary of JFK’s death was Israel.

  386. @Sparkon

    You’re making things up. I made no mention of Lifton in my comment #327.

    You didn’t have to mention Lifton. Your thinking has Lifton’s fingerprints all over it. He was the first one to come up with all that bullshit.

    However, I did cite FD 302, the report from FBI agents O’Niel and Sibert, which is clear and unambiguous in its language:

    It’s neither clear nor ambiguous. It has a context which you (i.e., Lifton) choose to ignore.

    The wound in JFK’s back was shallow with no exit.

    Yeah, stick your fingers in your ears and go “Neener, neener, neener.”

    Seventeen out of seventeen forensic pathologists and other medical professionals working on behalf of not just the original autopsy but three distinguished panels from the nineteen-sixties and nineteen-seventies (i.e., Clark Panel, Rockefeller Commission, & the HSCA) all agreed on the direction of the bullet which struck Kennedy in the upper back, with sixteen out of seventeen (only Cyril Wecht disagreed) agreeing that it is same round which caused all of Connally’s wounds. They relied not only on their experience examining thousands of bodies and gunshot wounds, but also the photos and X-rays taken at the Kennedy autopsy.

    But who are these experts compared to you channeling Lifton.

  387. Ron Unz says:
    @Pincher Martin

    BTW, you guys like to talk about what a couple of doctors at Parkland thought about Kennedy’s wounds. But all three attending surgeons and their attendants thought Connally’s wounds were caused by one bullet. And they spent far more time with Connally’s body than any of the Parkland doctors spent with Kennedy’s

    I see that “Pincher Martin” is still very active on this thread, producing long and detailed arguments that Oswald was absolutely, positively the lone gunman in the JFK assassination, which involved no conspiracy whatsoever, the vast amount of evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.

    However, this article is actually about the RFK assassination, so I’ll repeat an earlier question for him. The official coroner’s report on RFK reveals that he was shot point-blank range from behind, at a distance of a couple of inches with powder burns on his neck, while all the witnesses agree that Sirhan was standing several feet in front of him. Also, Sirhan’s gun held only eight rounds, while according to the audio tape at least a dozen shots were fired. Martin seems to be entirely avoiding this issue.

    So perhaps he believes that President Kennedy was killed by a lone nut who was himself immediately killed by another lone nut, but also admits that his younger brother Sen. Kennedy died at the hands of a secret conspiracy, which merely framed a third lone nut as the killer? The Kennedy family seems to have an unfortunate relationship with such lone nuts…

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  388. @ivan

    Do you understand the difference between a planned assassination of a sitting President and the subsequent knocking off of the same assassin?

    Your distinction is artificial. There’s no proven difference in the compulsion to homicide which depends on the target. Why should we assume that someone who murders a president will be *more* crazy (in other words, their motive less explicable) than someone who murders the assassin of a president?

    Anyone who spent five minutes talking to Ruby in the nineteen-sixties would tell you the guy was not right in the head.

    • Replies: @ivan
  389. @Ron Unz

    However, this article is actually about the RFK assassination…

    But, Ron, as Laurent himself writes above, “That is why I have argued before — and I repeat in my new book — that the ultimate key to the JFK whodunit is in RFK’s assassination…” [my emphasis in bold].

    So by undermining the silly questions surrounding Oswald’s obvious guilt in the JFK assassination, I undo the mythology you are trying to build up about RFK’s assassination.

    I also know the political history of that period far better than anyone here.

    1) RFK was not on his way to being elected president in 1968. He was well behind Hubert Humphrey in the delegate count and the Democratic power brokers had abandoned him. *They* knew this, even if you do not.

    And if RFK was not on his way to winning the presidency, then what need was there for the deep state to assassinate him? Especially since a failed assassination attempt might have been one of the few ways for Kennedy to win over disaffected Democratic leaders that year.

    2) Despite Talbot’s contention, there is no serious evidence that RFK planned to investigate his brother’s death if he was elected president. He wasn’t collecting evidence so much as hiding it. How likely would it have been for RFK to reveal his key role in the anti-Castro operations, which was necessary for any serious investigation into his brother’s death? Would he also have been as open in revealing his role as attorney general signing off on the domestic spying of civil rights leaders?

    Robert Kennedy in 1968 still had a lot to hide about his and his brother’s past. So any openness on his part would’ve spoiled a second Kennedy administration the moment he revealed it.

    BTW, did you know that LBJ asked RFK to give him two suggestions for members to make up the Warren Commission, and that the attorney general selected Allen Dulles and John McCloy? So Robert Kennedy is responsible for Allen Dulles being on the Warren Commission.

    3) For all the garbage written about the special bond between the brothers, Kennedy lovers forget that there was still one powerful Kennedy brother alive in the nineteen-seventies and he publicly continued to accept the Warren Commission.

    Back to you, Ron:

    The official coroner’s report on RFK reveals that he was shot point-blank range from behind, at a distance of a couple of inches with powder burns on his neck, while all the witnesses agree that Sirhan was standing several feet in front of him.

    I’ve read Thomas Noguchi’s book Coronor, which has a full chapter on his medical examination of RFK’s body, so I know you are describing Kennedy’s head wound incorrectly.

    Noguchi discovered the powder burns on RFK’s *hair* which had been shaved away by the medical staff to provide access to the wound by the doctors treating him. The hair was not on the body when Noguchi began his examination, so the LA County medical examiner asked that the hair be brought to him for analysis. His lab later confirmed it had “soot” in it,which meant the weapon had been right next to Kennedy’s head (“one to three inches away”) when it was fired. The bullet hit the mastoid area behind Kennedy’s right ear.

    If Noguchi spoke of “powder burns on the neck,” he does not mention it in his book. But he speaks at length about the soot found in Kennedy’s hair.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  390. I don’t know nearly as much about RFK’s assassination as I do about JFK’s assassination, but the reactions to the two killings by conspiracy mongers are revealing.

    Nearly everything the conspiracy mongers bring up as a concern about Oswald’s case is missing in Sirhan Sirhan.

    * Oswald was shot two days after his trial (but Sirhan is still alive today).

    * Oswald never went to trial (but Sirhan did go to trial and has had many appeals).

    * Only one person in Dealey Plaza (Howard Brennan) actually identified Oswald shooting a rifle from the Texas School Book Depository (but several eyewitnesses saw Sirhan Sirhan shoot his weapon in the Ambassador Hotel kitchen).

    * Oswald never admitted guilt during his two days in confinement; nor has anyone else acquainted with Oswald ever said that he mentioned a desire to kill Kennedy; Oswald only said he was a “patsy” (but Sirhan admitted to wanting to kill RFK; he even wrote it down).

    * No clear motive was ever given for why Oswald would want to kill President Kennedy (Sirhan, on the other hand, gave a clear and consistent motive for why he wanted Kennedy dead).

    This is why conspiracists are dishonest. There is really nothing in the Oswald case which will change their mind. Their outrage or concern about Oswald’s lack of motive, lack of eyewitnesses, lack of a trial, his quick death in custody, and absence of a confession are all selective. As Sirhan’s example shows, nothing that happened on November 22nd could possibly have changed their minds about Oswald’s guilt. They would still think him innocent if he were alive today and admitted to the crime.

    • Replies: @bayviking
  391. gatobart says:

    So you can clearly see here the workings of a deeply obsessive and delusional mind, how it selectively picks and discard pieces and bits according to their relevance to the shelf life of its own fantasies and compulsions. For example, the indisputable fact that Dr. Humes confirmed that the back wound had no exit and that couldn’t have possibly been the entry wound for the neck wound, as it was located several inches below, and it followed a downward angle of +45 degree, means absolutely nothing compared to the very subjective “argument” of him that according to some individuals Ruby had an obsessive love for JFK and that he killed Oswald during a sudden attack of affection for poor Jackie. There you can see how people of this kind will embrace with burning passion even the shakiest piece of information, if we may call it that instead of simple gossip, while refusing to acknowledged facts that have been confirmed in legal forensic documents.

    But what is really the most grotesque thing in all this is that this same individual will surely refuse to acknowledge an argument of the same, subjective, nature as the one already described (one which he embraces with passion as if it was the absolute truth: Ruby adored JFK) because this other one goes in the opposite direction of his fantasies, even if it can be considered far more solid and credible than his own. Oswald declaring that he liked Kennedy, that he appreciated his progressive social policies and that he would have never tried to kill him. Can you see the blatant and humongous intellectual dishonesty here…? So for him is enough that some random guy says that Ruby loved JFK to have the surefire motive for him killing LHO. But on the other hand the fact that Oswald himself is on record as saying that he liked Kennedy has absolutely no weight in absolving him in his assassination…! As i said, paying any attention to this guy is a complete waste of time.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  392. Ron Unz says:
    @Pincher Martin

    The hair was not on the body when Noguchi began his examination, so the LA County medical examiner asked that the hair be brought to him for analysis. His lab later confirmed it had “soot” in it,which meant the weapon had been right next to Kennedy’s head (“one to three inches away”) when it was fired. The bullet hit the mastoid area behind Kennedy’s right ear.

    Thanks for correcting my faulty memory, hardly difficult since I’ve never claimed to be a huge expert in the RFK assassination.

    So as you’ve now reiterated, RFK was killed by a gunshot fired behind his right ear one to three inches from his head, while Sirhan was standing several feet in front of him. Thus, he was slain by a conspiracy, utilizing Sirhan as a patsy, QED.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  393. ivan says:
    @Pincher Martin

    You have a weird schtick : Only behavioural observations are important, motives internal or external do not count. I guess if you were a judge, it would be impossible in your court to convict an accessory to murder . For after all “what difference did it make” if a woman’s killer was hired by her ex-husband or not. It was the hitman who did it, dammit!

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  394. @Ron Unz

    So as you’ve now reiterated, RFK was killed by a gunshot fired behind his right ear one to three inches from his head, while Sirhan was standing several feet in front of him. Thus, he was slain by a conspiracy, utilizing Sirhan as a patsy, QED.

    But, Ron, if we have all these eyewitnesses testifying as to the exact location of Sirhan Sirhan in relation to Kennedy’s body during all of his many shots, why didn’t most of them step forward to identify the real killer during Sirhan’s first trial?

    Should’ve been a snap. According to the LAPD, there were 77 people in that small room with Kennedy.

    I also disagree with your logic. If Sirhan Sirhan started shooting and one of Kennedy’s bodyguards or a police/security officer who was standing right behind Kennedy pulled out his weapon and fired in self-defense, accidentally striking Kennedy in the exchange, then we still do not have a conspiracy.

    But one would think someone would’ve seen it. All eyes would’ve been on Bobby Kennedy before the shooting. He was the center of attention in that room. So for someone to get a weapon right next to his head (“one to three inches”), fire it, and NOT BE IDENTIFIED is quite a trick.

    Tell us how you would’ve pulled that trick off, Ron. Get right up next to someone in a room filled with people, put a gun to the back of his head, shoot it, and not be seen. And do all this while someone else in the room who is not six feet away from Kennedy is firing wildly at him and therefore also at you.

  395. @ivan

    You have a weird schtick : Only behavioural observations are important, motives internal or external do not count. I guess if you were a judge, it would be impossible in your court to convict an accessory to murder.

    There’s nothing weird about it. Motive is unimportant in a court of law except as a storytelling device by which prosecutors try to convince a jury of a defendant’s guilt or by which a judge determines sentencing.

    Here is how one legal website puts it:

    Proof of motive is not required in a criminal prosecution. In determining the guilt of a criminal defendant, courts are generally not concerned with why the defendant committed the alleged crime, but whether the defendant committed the crime. However, a defendant’s motive is important in other stages of a criminal case, such as police investigation and sentencing. Law enforcement personnel often consider potential motives in detecting perpetrators. Judges may consider the motives of a convicted defendant at sentencing and either increase a sentence based on avaricious motives or decrease the sentence if the defendant’s motives were honorable—for example, if the accused acted in defense of a family member.

    In criminal law, motive is distinct from intent. Criminal intent refers to the mental state of mind possessed by a defendant in committing a crime. With few exceptions the prosecution in a criminal case must prove that the defendant intended to commit the illegal act. The prosecution need not prove the defendant’s motive. Nevertheless, prosecutors and defense attorneys alike may make an issue of motive in connection with the case.

    For example, if a defendant denies commission of the crime, he may produce evidence showing that he had no motive to commit the crime and argue that the lack of motive supports the proposition that he did not commit the crime. By the same token, the prosecution may produce evidence that the defendant did have the motive to commit the crime and argue that the motive supports the proposition that the defendant committed the crime. Proof of motive, without more evidence tying a defendant to the alleged crime, is insufficient to support a conviction.

    I’ve been trying to tell you that’s why all this talk about motive is a waste of time.

    There were literally hundreds of thousands of people in the U.S. in 1963 who had some motive to kill Kennedy. Communists angry at him for U.S. policy in the Cold War. Cold War zealots angry at him for not being a stalwart warrior-president in that same war. Civil Rights activists angry that he was moving too slow on civil rights. White southerners angry that he was moving too fast on civil rights. And, yes, even mobsters would be included.

    Hell, we could include even Jackie as someone who had a motive for killing the president since she didn’t like political life and was upset about his extramarital affairs. Don’t laugh. Men and women kill each other every day in America over such domestic reasons.

    So motive is unimportant to establishing guilt. You need much, much more. And the problem is that you don’t have any more. You lack evidence, which is why conspiracists lack any collective focus in their various books. Some pick the CIA; some the mob; some LBJ; some Nixon; some Hoover; some the communists; some Texas oilmen; etc. The list goes on and on and on. A few zanies get around this problem by indicting everyone on the list.

  396. @gatobart

    That way Humes may well have stuck his own finger in the back wound and found out that there was solid muscle only one or two inches inside, but that is a fact that has to be cropped out of the narrative because then, how could they keep on with their lie that this was the entry wound for the exit through the neck…?

    Humes himself has admitted his initial mistake in describing the wound as superficial. He understood he had made a mistake the moment he spoke with Dr. Perry of Parkland Hospital and was told about the tracheotomy which obscured the throat wound during Humes’ autopsy.

    If Humes could admit his mistake so quickly, why are you having a much more difficult time accepting your own mistake even after my many patient corrections?

    Impossible, even more so when this back wound was in a 45 to 60 degree angle and located inches lower than the other wound…! That is quite a trip upward the chest that magic bullet would have had to take to win the six or seven inches needed to reach the windpipe.

    The back wound was higher than what was described in the Warren Report, a mistake made because the WC investigators were not allowed to look at either the photos or the X-rays when writing their report. All they could do was take Dr. Humes’s testimony and ask him to make a sketch of the wound placement, which he did well after the autopsy was over and his memory faulty.

    But more than a dozen forensic pathologists looked at the photos and the X-rays and came to the conclusion that the wounds in the upper back and the throat were consistent with a single bullet fired from the back and above.

    If more than a dozen forensic pathologists tell you something is possible after they look at the evidence, then you damn well better listen to them.

    That is a blatant lie. There is at least one piece of indisputable evidence given by the laws of Physics that proves that at least two kind of rifles were used for the wound in the neck, not to mention the one on the back, and the last one.

    The only person in this discussion who is asking us to suspend any physical laws is you when you try to sell us on the idea that a high-velocity round will only make a superficial entry in the fleshy part of the back and then disappear.

    That’s far more impressive than a “magic bullet.” You have invoked two “disappearing bullets” to explain Kennedy’s wounds. One which entered Kennedy’s back and one which entered the throat. Both made wounds without going clean through the body and yet both disappeared.

    Connelly was sure that the bullet that hit Kennedy wasn’t the one that hit him NOT because he was confused by the event but because he remembered all too well that he was able to hear the first shot, the one wounding JFK, and that had made him try to turn around to see the back of the car and that was at that moment when he was hit himself.

    No, it’s not. Watch and listen closely. Perhaps you might learn something.

    • Replies: @anarchyst
    , @bayviking
  397. @gatobart

    For example, the indisputable fact that Dr. Humes confirmed that the back wound had no exit and that couldn’t have possibly been the entry wound for the neck wound, as it was located several inches below, and it followed a downward angle of +45 degree….

    You don’t mention a single “indisputable fact” in this list. Not even by accident.

    Since you claim to love physics, please tell us how a high-velocity round could enter Kennedy’s back and then … disappear.

    When Dr. Humes was trying to figure this mystery out and suggested in a phone call to Dr. Perry of Parkland Hospital that perhaps “cardiac massage” was responsible for pushing the bullet out of Kennedy’s back, even the relatively inexperienced Parkland Hospital doctor told him that was “very unlikely.” It was then that Dr. Perry mentioned the throat wound and Dr. Humes immediately understood his mistake.

    I’ve written about this like five times now in this thread, so I’m sure you will continue misrepresenting it.

    …means absolutely nothing compared to the very subjective “argument” of him that according to some individuals Ruby had an obsessive love for JFK and that he killed Oswald during a sudden attack of affection for poor Jackie.

    It wasn’t “sudden.” Ruby’s love of JFK was well-known. Over a dozen people who knew Ruby testified to it, including Ruby’s own sister.

    Watch this exchange between Bugliosi and the Jack Ruby biographer and conspiracist Seth Kantor beginning at 12:10 of the following video. At around 13:00, Bugliosi gets Kantor to admit that Ruby had a “very deep affection” for Jack Kennedy and that “there was all kinds of evidence for that.” Bugliosi even gets Kantor to admit that Ruby said that Kennedy’s death affected him more than the deaths of Ruby’s own father and mother.

    Oswald declaring that he liked Kennedy, that he appreciated his progressive social policies and that he would have never tried to kill him.

    I’ve never said anything to the contrary. There’s no evidence that Oswald hated Kennedy or ever spoke about killing him to Marina, who would have been the only confidante he ever mentioned something like that to in the U.S. In fact, Marina admitted that while her husband spoke about killing Nixon, he had never said anything about killing Kennedy and that he even liked the man.

    But there’s new evidence that while in Mexico City Oswald did speak out at a private pro-Castro party that someone should kill Kennedy. I take this new evidence lightly, however, neither rejecting it nor accepting it. But the argument is provided in the 2013 book, A Cruel and Shocking Act: The Secret History of the Kennedy Assassination, based on Philip Shenon’s exclusive interviews with Sylvia Duran and her family and associates in Mexico.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  398. @Pincher Martin

    But there’s new evidence that while in Mexico City Oswald did speak out at a private pro-Castro party that someone should kill Kennedy. I take this new evidence lightly, however, neither rejecting it nor accepting it. But the argument is provided in the 2013 book, A Cruel and Shocking Act: The Secret History of the Kennedy Assassination, based on Philip Shenon’s exclusive interviews with Sylvia Duran and her family and associates in Mexico.

    Here is the selection from the book talking about this explosive allegation, although I conflated it with something else when I said it happened at a private pro-Castro party. It’s very long but worth the read:

    On Wednesday, June 17 [1964], according to Hoover’s files, the FBI director prepared an especially sensitive, top secret letter to Rankin [general counsel for the Warren Commission]. The contents were explosive, or at least they had the potential to be. According to Hoover’s letter, it appeared that Cuban diplomats in Mexico City had advance knowledge of Oswald’s plan to kill Kennedy—because Oswald had told them about it. If the information gathered by the FBI was correct, Oswald had marched into the Cuban embassy in Mexico in October 1963 and announced, “I’m going to kill Kennedy.”

    Hoover might have feared the commission’s reaction to his letter. What did it mean that Cuban diplomats in Mexico had known weeks in advance about Oswald’s plans to murder the president? Was this evidence of the foreign conspiracy that Hoover had seemed so determined to rule out? More to the point for the FBI, did this information suggest that the bureau had bungled its investigation in Mexico City and that there might still be people there who needed to be tracked down because they had known about, or even encouraged, Oswald’s plans? The ultimate source of the information in the letter was, remarkably enough, Fidel Castro himself. The Cuban dictator’s words had been relayed to the FBI from a “confidential” bureau informant who “had furnished reliable information in the past,” Hoover wrote. According to the informant, Castro had recently been overheard in Havana talking about what his diplomats in Mexico City had known about Oswald. “Our people in Mexico gave us the details in a full report of how he acted when he came to Mexico,” Castro was quoted as saying.

    According to Castro, Oswald became infuriated when he was told that he would not be granted, on the spot, a travel visa for Cuba. He turned his rage not against the Cuban government but against Castro’s nemesis—Kennedy. Oswald seemed to blame the American president for the breakdown in relations with Cuba that was now making it so difficult for him to begin his new life in Havana. “Oswald stormed into the embassy, demanded the visa, and, when it was refused to him, headed out saying, ‘I’m going to kill Kennedy for this,’” Castro was quoted as saying. He said the Cuban diplomats in Mexico had not taken Oswald seriously and ignored his threat against the president’s life, believing that the young American might be some sort of CIA provocateur. The Cuban government, Castro continued to insist, had nothing to do with the assassination of the president.

    In the letter, Hoover offered no clue to the identity of the bureau’s confidential source in Havana. Years later, the FBI would reveal that it was Jack Childs, a Chicago man who posed as a devoted member of the American Communist Party but was, in fact, working for the FBI. Childs visited Castro in Havana in June 1964, the same month that Hoover prepared his letter to Rankin. Childs’s brother, Maurice, a fellow Communist Party member, also spied for the FBI. The work of the Childs brothers—Operation Solo, the bureau called it—would be considered one of the bureau’s greatest Cold War accomplishments. Under the cover of promoting the cause of Communism, the brothers traveled throughout the Communist world, meeting Khrushchev, Mao, and Castro, among others, and then feeding what they had learned back to the FBI. The bureau’s records showed that the information from the Childs brothers proved remarkably accurate.

    But the commission would never have the chance to ponder the implications of all this—including the possibility that Oswald had announced loudly to Cuban diplomats in Mexico City that he intended to kill the president—because Hoover’s June 1964 letter to Rankin appears never to have reached the commission. What happened to it would remain a mystery decades later. The letter could not be found in the commission’s files stored at the National Archives or in Rankin’s personal files, which his family donated to the archives after his death. Former staff members were perplexed when they heard about the existence of the letter. Eisenberg had no recollection of ever seeing it or of being told about it by Redlich or anyone else. He said he was convinced he would have heard about it if Redlich had seen it, since it was so obviously important. David Slawson was convinced he never saw it either; he said he would have remembered such a “bombshell” document. Although nothing in the public record suggests that Hoover’s letter ever reached the commission, a copy did reach another agency: the CIA. Decades after the Warren Commission completed its investigation, the letter turned up in the agency’s files that were declassified as a result of continuing debate over Kennedy’s death.*

    Oswald was known to explode when he didn’t get his way. He had attempted suicide, for example, when it looked as if Moscow would not grant him entry into the Soviet Union.

    What’s far more interesting is it appears that Hoover’s letter to the Warren Commission about this incident in Mexico City was hijacked by the CIA and thus the Warren Commission never had a chance to read it.

    Why would the CIA do such a thing?

    Well, Shenon believes that one possibility is that the CIA also heard this outburst by Oswald, recorded it, but then didn’t warn the government about it. Once the CIA heard about this FBI letter to the Commission, it would have reason to fear its delivery. The only two possibilities for the Warren Commission would be that the CIA was incompetent in its eavesdropping capabilities in Mexico City or that it had heard the outburst and still failed in its task to warn the government about the possible assassination of the president.

    Neither one looks good.

    • Thanks: S
    • Replies: @S
    , @S
  399. Excellent and important article. Thanks

  400. S says:
    @Pincher Martin

    Oswald was known to explode when he didn’t get his way.

    Yes, he’d often respond by impulsively and irrationally ‘acting out’ in some fashion.

    When Oswald’s marriage proposal to German was rejected in the Soviet Union, he very shortly afterwards decided he didn’t like life in the USSR so much anymore and began making arrangements to return to the United States. He would also make the decision to marry Marina, whom he’d only known for a few short weeks.

    “Oswald stormed into the embassy, demanded the visa, and, when it was refused to him, headed out saying, ‘I’m going to kill Kennedy for this,’” Castro was quoted as saying.

    Castro, even while amongst those he believed to be sincere fellow Communists, could have been seeking to simply enhance his own personal prestige here with questionable claims of ‘foreknowledge’, as so many others have done regarding the JFK assassination with tweaked ‘facts’ after the event.

    Years later, the FBI would reveal that it was Jack Childs, a Chicago man who posed as a devoted member of the American Communist Party but was, in fact, working for the FBI.

    Or, were the Childs brothers simply another example of the seemingly numberless Soviet ‘double agents’ who all too easily were able to succesfully dupe overly credulous Western security agencies?

    As evidence, all in all, it’s probably best to take it ‘lightly’ as you have indicated.

    Having said that, if Shenon’s hypothesis is correct that certain rarified Latin American diplomatic and US intelligence agency circles did indeed have a somewhat limited and uncertain foreknowledge of Oswald’s murderous intentions towards Kennedy, it might help explain the link below.

    A frustrated, angry, and jobless Oswald would return from Mexico City to Dallas on October 3, ’63. Later that very same month, Oswald having been hired on at the TSBD, a potentially related event would take place:

    http://niagarafallsreporter.com/Stories/2013/Sep3/lostepisode.html

    • Replies: @Sparkon
    , @Pincher Martin
  401. Sparkon says:
    @S

    A frustrated, angry, and jobless Oswald would return from Mexico City to Dallas on October 3, ’63

    I‘m not surprised to see you encouraging Pincher, but you’re just as wrong as he is:

    Image: http://www.justice-integrity.org

    Now, I’ve put you and Pincher back on ignore, and, for the time being at least, I will refrain from making any more comments here on JFK’s assassination.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
    , @gatobart
  402. @S

    Castro, even while amongst those he believed to be sincere fellow Communists, could have been seeking to simply enhance his own personal prestige here with questionable claims of ‘foreknowledge’, as so many others have done regarding the JFK assassination with tweaked ‘facts’ after the event.

    I agree. I don’t know whether to believe the report or not. I do wonder why Shenon didn’t attempt to contact Havana for confirmation. (Perhaps he tried and mentioned it in a footnote which I missed.)

    Castro didn’t die until 2016, and I’m not sure what reason Castro would have for not repeating this report publicly if it was true. In 1964, he may have avoided publicizing it because he feared it would be used against him as proof of a conspiracy against Kennedy and used as a pretext for invasion. But what was keeping him from talking about it in, say, 2004? Or even much earlier?

    So I’m agnostic as to the truth of the report. But if true, it does contradict one common theme by conspiracists, which is that Oswald never spoke of killing Kennedy, never spoke disparagingly of Kennedy, and might have even admired the president.

    That’s never bothered me. Like I’ve already said several times in this thread, discussing motive is a largely a waste of time. It’s clear by Oswald’s actions from Thursday afternoon to the moment he was caught that he the had intent to kill the president. What his motive was we will probably never know.

    • Replies: @S
  403. @Sparkon

    Sparky is addicted to these golden oldies of the early conspiracy movement that were debunked before he was probably even born.

  404. anarchyst says:
    @Pincher Martin

    Sound travels at approximately 1100 feet per second. Connelly was probably “hit” before he heard the sound of the gunfire.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  405. gatobart says:
    @Sparkon

    I’ve put you and Pincher back on ignore, and, for the time being at least, I will refrain from making any more comments here on JFK’s assassination.

    Good for you, for me and for the rest of us doing the same thing as it is obvious that who we have been facing up to now in the person of this PM is not just someone who is willing to openly and frankly confront his own views on a subject with those of other people, but more of a mental case, which should be clear by now by the unending sequence of long meandering posts that fall all over the place, that serve no purpose other than to reaffirm his own preconceived notions and that give the thread the look of the monologue of someone who feels the need to be constantly reassuring himself about something that is very important to him, oblivious to what others have to say. I have concluded myself at this point that what this individual is doing is what psychologists call transference, which means he is using this subject, and this thread, to settle accounts within some unresolved (for him) conflict in his own past, his life; he is expressing his anger at something that may have happened in his life, an incident, a crime, an injustice, that ended without an obvious culprit (to him) being punished. In other words, the poor guy hates that people conclude that LHO was innocent because he sees here a mirror situation to one in his past when an obvious guilty part, father, mother, uncle, got away with a crime, a fault, was found innocent despite his, PM’s, claims or accusations. So my advice to him is just to face the truth of his behavior, stop babbling about the JFK assassination, stop putting us to sleep with this interminable and mindless posts, stop this mental diarrhea of him and go see a good shrink.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
    , @ivan
  406. @anarchyst

    Connally heard the first shot that missed everything, although Connally mistakenly believes it hit Kennedy.

    He didn’t hear the *second* shot which hit both him and the president. More importantly, I don’t think he immediately felt the second shot, either. That’s a common reaction among gunshot victims, some of whom even walk around with fatal gunshot wounds for a while before they succumb to injuries they didn’t realize they had.

    One of the best explanations I’ve read for why it took Connally a moment before he felt his injuries was because the pain would’ve only become obvious to him when he tried to breathe through a partially collapsed lung. A body can sometimes ignore a great shock to it for a moment or two, but it can’t ignore not being able to breath properly.

    And as I said earlier in one of my posts. Connally and his wife (Nellie) argued about the sequence of events that took place that day when they went before the Warren Commission. (They came together that day to testify and argued amongst themselves in front of the lawyers about what happened on November 22nd) You have to consider that while witness testimony is important, it’s often flawed.

    Here is the relevant part of Connally’s testimony:

    “I heard a noise which I immediately took to be a rifle shot,” he told Specter. “I instinctively turned to my right because the sound appeared to come from over my right shoulder.… The only thought that crossed my mind was this was an assassination attempt.”

    He said he had no memory of hearing the second shot—the one he believed hit him—but “I was in either a state of shock or the impact was such that the sound didn’t even register on me.” But he felt it: “I felt like someone had hit me in the back.” Blood started to pour from his chest, he said, and he assumed he was moments from death. “I knew I had been hit, and I immediately assumed, because of the amount of blood … that I had probably been fatally hit.”

    “So I merely doubled up,” he said. “And Mrs. Connally pulled me over to her lap. So I reclined with my head in her lap, conscious all the time, and with my eyes open.”

    Then he heard another shot, which he was later told was the third shot. He said he assumed it was aimed at Kennedy. “I heard the shot very clear. I heard it hit him,” he said. “It never entered my mind that it ever hit anybody but the president.”

    Suddenly, he said, the passenger compartment was covered with blood and bits of human tissue. The tissue was “pale blue—brain tissue, which I immediately recognized, and I recall very well.” On his trousers, Connally said, there was “one chunk of brain tissue as big as almost my thumb.” He remembered yelling out: “Oh, no, no, no.… My God, they are going to kill us all.”*

    Connally agreed with his wife that separate bullets hit him and Kennedy. “The man fired three shots, and he hit each of the three times he fired,” he said. “He obviously was a pretty good marksman.” He said the president was silent after the first shot. After the last shot, he heard Mrs. Kennedy cry out: “They have killed my husband.… I have got his brains in my hand.”

    BTW, Connally was convinced that Oswald acted alone and that all three shots he heard came from the rear.

  407. @gatobart

    My God, you two are a couple of whiny babies. You’re unable to consider new evidence or new arguments or even hear a different voice from your own without running to the ignore button.

  408. ivan says:
    @gatobart

    I tend to agree, although he is a genial fellow. Anyone who responds to a comment with an ever longer litany of “he says, she says” that canters around the point is wearisome.

    • Replies: @gatobart
    , @Pincher Martin
  409. gatobart says:
    @ivan

    In any case the fruitcake steamrolled his way into killing the thread. This is dead now, he owns it but it is dead. Maybe you find that genius but if everyone was doing his same trick Internet debating would already be a thing of the past by now. I for one am halting my contribution to this thread.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  410. @ivan

    I’ve avoided no points. Perhaps you just find reading wearisome.

  411. @gatobart

    This thread was dead the moment you showed up to push your wrong ideas and stupid arguments. But lucky for you I revived it. I put this discussion on an informed and sound evidentiary footing.

    You have a series of talking points on the Kennedy assassinations that is false. Most of them were proven false more than fifty years ago. You can either update your assumptions or you can continue whining when I correct you. I don’t care which. But in either case, I will continue to show you don’t know what you are talking about for as long as continue to push lies.

  412. bayviking says:
    @Pincher Martin

    The question of whether Oswald actually fired a gun traced to him in Daley Plaza has doubters, but he certainly might have and it changes nothing regarding the fact that the killing was part of a larger carefully planned conspiracy.

    The fact was established on appeal after CIA agent E Howard Hunt won a $650,000 judgement against the “Spotlight” for a story linking Hunt to the JFK assassination. Attorney Mark Lane led the appeal which convinced a jury the CIA was involved in JFK’s assassination. The testimony of Marita Lorenz turned the case upside down and the jury believed her. This led Mark Lane to eventually write “Plausible Denial”, which further solidified the case against the CIA.

    Ms. Lorenz traveled in a two car caravan from Miami to Dallas immediately before JFK was assassinated with CIA operative Frank Sturgis, two high powered rifles with scopes and the Novo brothers. The Novo brothers were used by the CIA to kill Chilean government official Orlando Letelier and Ronnie Moffit in Washington DC, under the direction of Michael Townley. They were convicted of those murders. When they arrived in Dallas Mr. Sturgis met with both Howard Hunt and Jack Ruby.

    You can claim all my facts are false, and a few details are bound to be incorrect. But, the evidence for a conspiracy is overwhelming, a power play to keep the CIA fully empowered, the Vietnam War and the Israeli nuclear bomb program going rested on killing Kennedy. For one thing JFK had issued an executive order which prevented the CIA from operating anywhere with anything more powerful than a handgun. Kennedy also had in mind to get rid of J Edgar Hoover and certain key CIA personnel. LBJ reversed those JFK executive orders, ignored Israel’s attack on the USS Liberty which killed 85 US soldiers, and did nothing to stop Israel from acquiring a nuclear weapon. Perpetual war was re-established.

    The jury foremen stated, “Mr. Lane asked us to do something very difficult. He was asking us to believe John Kennedy had been killed by our own government. Yet, when we examined the evidence closely, we were compelled to conclude the IA had indeed killed President Kennedy.”

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  413. bayviking says:

    Allen Welsh Dulles (April 7, 1893 – January 29, 1969) was the first civilian Director of Central Intelligence (DCI), and its longest-serving director to date. As head of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) during the early Cold War, he oversaw the 1953 Iranian coup d’état, the 1954 Guatemalan coup d’état, the Lockheed U-2 aircraft program, the Project MKUltra mind control program and the Bay of Pigs Invasion. He was fired by John F. Kennedy over the latter fiasco.

    After being fired Allen Dulles became one of the members of the Warren Commission investigating the assassination of John F. Kennedy. A powerful man in many policy conflicts with JFK while JFK was President. A man prepared to restore the full power of the CIA, as an un-elected violent organization. An organization created by President Truman, who later denounced the CIA and called for its being radically restructured because it was completely out of control and accountable to no one. President Kennedy was the only President to ever challenge the organization. Truman’s denouncement came after he had retired.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  414. Kramer says:
    @Triteleia Laxa

    Israel does not include Jordan, Egypt, etc. But Global Zionism dominates their political and economic scenes nevertheless, just like in the US.

    If they can dominate the most powerful country in the world, Jordan and Egypt are nothing in comparison. It is all a game of high finance and the media, their empire.

    But the reason Eretz Yisrael Hashlema does not currently exist is Iranian military superiority on the field. The Israelis were stopped in Lebanon by Iranian power. They are stopped at Gaza by the same.

    The US invasion of the Middle East, to conquer the land for Israel, was effectively resisted by Iran, and did not come to fruition.

    The ISIS conspiracy, another effort at conquest by the US-Israel, was also stopped by Iran.

    So, are they [our wealthy Jewish brothers] rich enough to dominate the US, Jordan, Egypt, and other capitalist markets around the world? Yes.

    Are they powerful enough to beat Iran on the battlefield? Ask Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Yemen, and Palestine.

    • Replies: @Triteleia Laxa
  415. @Kramer

    All of those things seem a lot harder than simply clearing the West Bank of Palestinians. Populations are cleared off land all of the time.

    Why have the Israelis not done it; despite them having decades of opportunity?

  416. @bayviking

    The fact was established on appeal after CIA agent E Howard Hunt won a $650,000 judgement against the “Spotlight” for a story linking Hunt to the JFK assassination. Attorney Mark Lane led the appeal which convinced a jury the CIA was involved in JFK’s assassination. The testimony of Marita Lorenz turned the case upside down and the jury believed her. This led Mark Lane to eventually write “Plausible Denial”, which further solidified the case against the CIA.

    There is much competition, but Mark Lane’s Plausible Denial is probably the worst book I have ever read on the JFK assassination. It is poorly written, discursive to the point of incoherence, and minimally sourced.

    The jury foremen stated, “Mr. Lane asked us to do something very difficult. He was asking us to believe John Kennedy had been killed by our own government. Yet, when we examined the evidence closely, we were compelled to conclude the CIA had indeed killed President Kennedy.”

    You are misrepresenting the decision. The jury in the Liberty Lobby case was not asked to judge who was behind the assassination of JFK, nor did they collectively make their decision with that in mind.

    Here is how Vincent Bugliosi describes Lane’s claims about the case. Buckle up; it’s brutal:

    Mark Lane, whose politics are as far away from that of Liberty Lobby as night is from day, was the defense attorney for Liberty Lobby and wrote a book about the case, Plausible Denial. The book in substantial part deals with matters totally unrelated to the trial, providing Lane with yet another opportunity to regurgitate all of his conspiracy theories and allegations about the Kennedy assassination. Plausible Denial is poorly written, very superficial (but then again, maybe it’s not, since Lane had nothing to write about), and even lacking in citations (a cardinal sin for any book on the assassination) to give the precise sources of Lane’s allegations. Remarkably, Lane doesn’t even tell his readers whether or not Marchetti was a defendant in the lawsuit (he was in the original complaint, but the case was dismissed against him prior to the trial), waits until page 129 to tell his readers what the Spotlight article says, and never finds the space in his 393 pages to inform his readers what Hunt’s formal complaint, the basis for the defamation lawsuit, trial, and Lane’s book, said. But it is inferable from the book that the main issue at the trial seemed to be the Spotlight article allegation that Hunt was in Dallas, not Washington, D.C., on the day of the assassination. Hunt, being the plaintiff, had the legal burden of proving a negative, that he wasn’t in Dallas on November 22, 1963, some twenty-two years before the trial, which was held in a U.S. district court in Miami in 1985.* He was unable to prove this to the satisfaction of the jury, something that millions of others might be unable to do also, and on February 6, 1985, the federal jury found “for the defendant, Liberty Lobby, and against the plaintiff, E. Howard Hunt.”

    Consistent with his MO, Lane led his readers to believe that the reason for the verdict against Hunt was that the Miami jury believed the CIA was responsible for Kennedy’s murder. But to support this, he only cites one juror, jury forewoman Leslie Armstrong, who said she believed this. But obviously, the issue of whether the CIA was behind the assassination was not for the jury to consider, and they apparently didn’t. The tireless and always industrious conspiracy researcher Harrison Edward Livingstone, in his book Killing the Truth, says that “UPI wrote that juror No. 11 (Cobb) ‘said the jury did not address the allegations brought out by Lane throughout the trial that Hunt was involved in a CIA conspiracy to kill Kennedy.’”32 And Newsweek reported that another juror, Suzanne Reach, told the Miami Herald (in support of what Cobb said) that what Armstrong said “wasn’t the reason for the verdict.”

    If there is one cardinal rule I would say that any person studying the Kennedy assassination should follow during his research, it’s that he must keep in mind that Mark Lane is a liar who serially misleads people about what happened on November 22nd, 1963.

    And Marita Lorenz? Really? Are you that desperate?

    • Replies: @bayviking
    , @S
  417. @bayviking

    Dulles was a sick old man by the nineteen-sixties. The CIA successes he led in the nineteen-fifties were exaggerated. Any close reading of what happened in Guatemala and Iran, for example, show that luck and persistence played a much larger role than did CIA planning or genius at covert operations. The U-2 program was Richard Bissell’s baby, not Allen Dulles’s. Dulles was bored with technology. He preferred the sexy James Bond stuff, not the brainy Q stuff.

    How did Allen Dulles end up on the Warren Commission? Robert Kennedy recommended him (and John McCloy) to LBJ when the attorney general was asked for suggestions. Dulles was good at attending the meetings, too, having one of the best attendance records of any of the seven Warren Commission members, but the staff lawyers who did the actual work of the commission say that Dulles was always falling asleep during testimony, only to awake and ask inappropriate questions.* Dulles even asked one of the testifying doctors (I forget which one, but probably Humes) about recommendations for dealing with his gout.

    * Those staff lawyers had a nickname for Marina Oswald and the seven commissioners, calling them Snow White and the seven dwarves. Which dwarf was Dulles? Sleepy.

    • Replies: @ivan
  418. ivan says:
    @ivan

    And by the way if Dulles had indeed led the way to the overthrow of Sukarno, Sukarno got no more than he deserved . A jumped up nationalist who by the sixties had no other means of theater to mesmerise the population with than to provoke conflicts with then Malaya, and suck up to Mao. I am not one of those who are reflexively against the CIA for everything they did. The CIA was not operating in a vacuum, there was a world-wide fight on with the Communists.

    The book is if I recall correctly, by the one of the usual Australian contingent of Communist sympathisers.

  419. @ivan

    I didn’t call Dulles a “dullard.” I said his reputation was exaggerated by the CIA’s early successes in the nineteen-fifties – Guatemala, Iran, U2, etc. – and that by the nineteen-sixties his health was failing. The death of his brother in 1959 also affected him since they had been partners in their statecraft under Eisenhower. And the CIA’s early successes were not due to Dulles’ brilliance as a tactician or strategist, but more due to luck and persistence and Dulles’s unwavering bureaucratic support.

    Indonesia was not considered a CIA success under Dulles. It was a failure, but one which mostly stayed out of the media limelight until later.

    If you think Dulles was a master chessman pushing pieces around the geostrategic chessboard and that he used that talent to engineer the deaths of the Kennedy brothers as the head of some ornate conspiracy, then you haven’t the slightest clue what he was about. Read a biography on the man written by someone other than a wingnut. Talbot’s book The Devil’s Chessboard doesn’t count.

    • Replies: @ivan
  420. I’m interested in reading more about the RFK assassination. Can anyone recommend the best book or books which deal with the crime and subsequent trial of Sirhan Sirhan?

    I want to know more about the facts of the case, and just the facts of the case – the eyewitness accounts, a map of the kitchen, the hard evidence, the testimony, etc. I don’t want speculation.

    • Replies: @Laurent Guyénot
  421. bayviking says:
    @Pincher Martin

    I make no claim as to the validity of direct CIA involvement in the murder, but subscribe to the fact that they along with J Edgar Hoover were involved in a cover-up to protect their careers and the agencies they worked for.

    But Maria Lorenz certainly adds to a mountain of evidence of CIA complicity. Whether to believe her or not is another matter, but the jury foreman certainly did. There is another women who places Oswald and Ruby together briefly in Ruby’s club.

    None of my opinion conflicts with anything Vincent Bugliosi said about Mark Lane, whom I have yet to read. My opinion is, thus far, largely shaped by the carefully documented books by Waldron and Hartmann, (Ultimate Sacrifice & Legacy of Secrecy) which makes them tedious to read. I am currently reading Final Judgement by Michael Piper, which contains some documentation. I will be the first to admit some of the documentation is circular in nature. I do subscribe to the conclusion of Waldron and Hartmann that the same mobster(s) were involved in the assassination of JFK, MLK and RFK. The continuous murdering of witnesses like Sam Giancana only hours before being required to testify before the HSCA and Johnny Roselli in a 55 gallon drum floating off the coast of Florida, all point to mob involvement. These are people who, if the mob were involved, would know who and why. A mob that is known to have been nationalized under Meyer Lansky, in spite of Hoover’s denials.

    Earlier you made a claim, just like Richard Feynman , that Kennedy was knocked forward. I do not dispute that, since he was obviously hit at least once from behind. I only question the direction of the second fatal shot. One of us is wrong about blood in the passenger compartment and it might be me. But two untraceable bullets were found in the passenger floor on a second inspection of the Presidential limo, after the bullet hole in the windshield disappeared.

    Vincent Bugliosi and Gerry Spence staged a mock trial for the BBC which I have watched. Bigliosi convinced a jury that Oswald killed Kennedy. The most interesting rebuttal to that conclusion, which only consists of more evidence of a conspiracy, not Oswald’s innocence, came from a retired FBI agent. While driving under the Daley Plaza overpass at the grassy knoll, he saw a man run down the back side with a long object which he threw in the back seat of his car and took off. The retired FBI agent testified under oath that he followed the car long enough to get it license plate which he later surrendered to the FBI. He took no other action because he was with his granddaughter and unwilling to enter a potentially dangerous situation.

    In the chaos which followed the assassination, the FBI apparently lost that clue. It is reminiscent of the FBI never acting on the concern a flight instructor had when his Arab students in Florida made it clear they wanted to learn how to fly a commercial plane, but not how to land it. It is known that Hoover ordered his troops to conclude that Oswald acted alone. LBJ felt strongly about that conclusion also because he did not want to start WWIII. and I hardly blame him for that. Oswald work ed for military intelligence before allegedly defecting and returning. Released documents prove he had associates and handlers with connections to the CIA and an investigative folder, which is only created to investigate the true allegence of suspected double agents. No one has ever accounted for how he was able to pay any of his bills, based only on book depository and similar known work. The questions and coincidences go on and on, seemingly forever.

  422. S says:
    @Pincher Martin

    In 1964, he [Castro] may have avoided publicizing it because he feared it would be used against him as proof of a conspiracy against Kennedy and used as a pretext for invasion.

    That could very well be.

    I believe it was the Dallas FBI field officer James Hosty who dealt with Oswald (or tried to, Oswald was never home) in the months prior to the assassination who expressed similar concerns.

    Hosty (IIRC) said something along the lines of the FBI not so much lying to the Warren Commission, but not emphasizing certain facts about events regarding Cuba and Oswald, specifically to avert a potential world war over the matter.

    I do wonder why Shenon didn’t attempt to contact Havana for confirmation… Castro didn’t die until 2016, and I’m not sure what reason Castro would have for not repeating this report publicly if it was true.

    The Mexico City station chief (1956-69) Winston Scott, may have been able to shed light on that question with the planned publication of his memoirs, It Came to Little, in 1971. Unfortunately, already having alerted the then Mexico City station Chief John R Horton of his intentions, and planning to meet within two days with CIA director Richard Helms to further flesh out his book project, Scott would die of an apparent heart attack on April 26, 1971.

    The CIA then confiscated Scott’s personal papers, including the book manuscript and an audio recording of Oswald, for ‘national security’ purposes.

    Winston Scott was a biggie in the CIA. He was the CIA’s first station chief in London in 1947, and has been sometimes referred to as the agency’s ‘proconsul’ in Mexico City as the station chief there.

    In the 1980’s the CIA returned the manuscript to Scott’s son Mike, but with everything post 1947 removed, the portion which it still retains.

    It’s clear by Oswald’s actions from Thursday afternoon to the moment he was caught that he the had intent to kill the president.

    I agree. Leaving the wedding ring in the cup on Friday morning was a sure sign he wasn’t ever intending to come back from what he was planning to do.

    What his motive was we will probably never know.

    True, though the Cuba situation could have been enough. The Kennedys were trying hard to assassinate Castro, and, according to Marina, Oswald’s alias ‘Hidel’ was intended to rhyme with Fidel, Oswald’s hero.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston_M._Scott

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  423. S says:
    @Pincher Martin

    There is much competition, but Mark Lane’s Plausible Denial is probably the worst book I have ever read on the JFK assassination. It is poorly written, discursive to the point of incoherence, and minimally sourced.

    Lane didn’t just write about the JFK assassination, he also wrote about the Vietnam War. Below is an excerpt and link to a 1970 New York Times book review of Lane’s anti-Vietnam War book Conversations With Americans.

    The book was so bad in regards to its lack of regard for actual truthfulness, that the writer, w