from: http://pages.about.com/search/chapter11.htm Click Here: <A HREF="http://pages.about.com/search/chapter11.htm">Preserving the legacy</A> ----- The National Security Interest Chapter 11 In 1970, Jim Garrison essentially explained the murders of John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr., in A Heritage of Stone, wherein he wrote: A nation which has the machinery for expression of divergent views presents a particular problem to the empire interests and to the military and intelligence forces... National leaders who have the charisma to be effective and who have a large following present an intolerable problem when they tell people of the immorality and the impracticality of our presence in Vietnam, of the countless billions our warfare state splurges on armaments, of the murders we commit in the name of national security. Whenever possible the CIA [Garrison's code word for self-appointed patriots, whether they are connected to the CIA or not] will seek to silence these voices by a massive discreditation of the individual or because he is too well known for derogatory fictions to be believed by the public, then his voice may be silenced by killing him.1 Written twenty-two years before JFK: The Movie, Jim Garrison, the cryptic propagandist characteristically took the truth that he was privy to, baited it with falsehood and produced the baffling Heritage of Oliver Stone. Garrison has a lot to teach, but he has a lot more to cover up, and one has to consequently take everything he has to say with a grain of salt. At the very least, his matter of fact citation was essentially the political assassinations formulae of all the murders we commit in the name of national security. If the precocious rhetoric of Jim Garrison was not and is not widely understood, it is because the impact of national security-motivated fanatics like J. Edgar Hoover has yet to be realistically assessed. Indeed, Americans are still struggling to understand the horrendous abuse of power that tyrants like J. Edgar Hoover are responsible for. Interviewed on Frontline in 1993, former Vice President Walter Mondale said: He [Hoover] had the power to enforce rules against ideas. Not violations of law, but ideas that he didn't like. That's the most dangerous thing to American liberty. Because -well that's tyranny.2 Mondale is certainly very accurate in his characterization of the political environment that Hoover promoted and it is time, not only to offer vague, general warnings about the danger that dictatorial demagogues posed, but to seriously assess the crimes they committed and to determine the nature of the operations which gave tyrants like J. Edgar Hoover the opportunity to routinely violate the law. Hoover waged war against identifiable enemies who were branded national security threats and silenced through circumstances which were unusual, suspicious, mysterious and even bizarre. The evidenciary consistency of the convenient, untimely demise of Hoover's targets manifests the political assassinations formulae that the precocious Garrison defined. In the final analysis, it is certainly not unreasonable to assume that after repeated, failed attempts to destroy political adversaries through what Garrison termed derogatory fictions, fanatics like Hoover were clearly prone to plot the assassination of their enemies. Czar Hoover is indeed clearly linked to an entire slew of politically motivated murders, including his indisputable involvement in the plots to cover up the Kennedy and King assassinations. Clearly, the John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King assassinations investigations were absolutely controlled by Hoover's FBI, and it is absolutely not possible to absolve the Director of his criminal, cover up culpability. Forever cunning, Hoover shielded himself from suspicion by manipulating honest law enforcement officials and creating the impression that his so-called investigations were supported by men of integrity. Immediately after the Kennedy assassination, for example, in conversation with presidential aide, Walter Jenkins, Hoover said: "The thing I am concerned about, and so is Mr. Katzenbach, is having something issued, so we can convince the public that Oswald is the real assassin. In the hands of master propagandists like Hoover and Johnson, Katzenbach, who was privy to no independent source beyond the fraud that Johnson and Hoover vigorously promoted, echoed the cover up scheme [which was essentially the very thing that the press did when it embraced, without scrutiny, the fraudulent Warren Report conclusions] and inadvertently enhanced Hoover's capacity to obstruct justice. Hoover's cover up tactics were difficult to expose because when he worked through honest, deservingly respected law enforcement officials like Katzenbach, he created the impression that there was no grounds to suspect the incredible deception and the fraud that covered up the truth about politically motivated murders. Clearly, when Hoover said, "I am concerned... and so is Katzenbach", he was simply ascribing his own fraudulent manipulations unto honest and forthright officials. In fact, Hoover never gave a damn about what Katzenbach was concerned about and Katzenbach, who was definitely not a part of the Hoover/Garrison cover up, was as confused about the unfolding of the Kennedy assassination investigation as any normal American was. Speaking about Jim Garrison in interview, Katzenbach frankly noted the confusion that a bizarre combination of truth and fantasy generated when he said, "I had the impression both before and after the assassination that Jim Garrison was an absolute nut".3 In retrospect, people like Katzenbach made the Justice Department worthy, people like J. Edgar Hoover robbed them of the opportunity to fulfil their potential, and people like Martin Luther King Jr., and John F. Kennedy, paid the ultimate price. Robert Blakey, the Director and Chief Counsel of the Select Committee that studied the Kennedy and King murders, described the similarity between the two political assassinations in the following terms: The parallel between these two tragic events of a trying decade in our history is striking -a dynamic leader in his prime, shot down by a sniper who was promptly determined to be a lone assassin. That Lee Harvey Oswald and James Earl Ray had acted without accomplices were the conclusions of official investigations that immediately followed -by the Warren Commission in the case of Oswald in September 1964; by the FBI in the case of Ray, who concurred at least momentarily by pleading guilty on March 10, l969.4 Blakey is quite accurate, but he conveniently ignored the fact that Hoover was the investigative force who monopolized all of the evidence in both the King and the Kennedy assassinations and he failed to acknowledge the undeniable, criminal culpability of J. Edgar Hoover in each case. Indeed, like every standard whitewash, he even pulled the "let's blame it on the Communists" routine by directing attention away from the embarrassing reality and towards propaganda-motivated, diversionary questions like: "Why did Yuri Nosenko, the KGB defector, lie about his knowledge of Oswald?" and "Did anti-Castro Cuban exiles put Oswald up to killing the president?" The questions are about as significant as asking Blakey about the color of his underwear. Blakey never fails to ask questions that divert attention away from the truth and towards the phoney, plausible denial theories which were deliberately exploited to cover up the truth about the Kennedy assassination. Indeed, in an interview that aired as late as November 5, 1994, Blakey went a step further than simply focusing attention upon misleading questions when he boldly claimed that Cubans recruited Lee Harvey Oswald to murder Kennedy.5 Perhaps Blakey is gearing up for the 31st anniversary of the Kennedy assassination to promote the dated allegation that Fidel "Castro got Kennedy." That's what Lyndon Johnson and Mafia cohorts like Johnny Roselli did in 1967 when Warren Report conclusions collapsed, and that is a fraud that no longer holds water. If Blakey continues to disseminate propaganda, he should perhaps be charged with obstruction of justice or conspiracy to cover up the truth about the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Blakey is no less deceptive when he exposes his reluctance to identify the scope of the King conspiracy. Clearly, Blakey is aware of the palpable bigotry and the identifiable bigot who is evidently responsible for the murder of Martin Luther King Jr. He in fact admits it when he writes that Martin Luther King, "a man of peace, had lived so long under the threat of violence; in fact, his call for an end to racism, war, and economic injustice, in the context of the turbulent 1960's, almost seemed to invite attack. His death, coming after Kennedy's, was not so shocking; it was almost expected." But if King had lived under the threat of violence for so long, then why was he not protected? How can Blakey so nonchalantly say that King's death was almost expected, and not assign definite, criminal culpability? Who expected his death? Who stood by and watched it happen? Who tried to provoke King into committing suicide? You do not need the six million dollar budget that Blakey had at his disposal to determine the fact that J. Edgar Hoover is directly responsibly for the murder of Martin Luther King. Good old common sense and the knowledge that J. Edgar Hoover monitored every single move that King ever made, is all that is required to hold him directly responsible. In the end, the very same compulsion that is responsible for all the crime that Hoover managed is responsible for betraying his culpability. The all-out surveillance that Hoover imposed was so absolutely pervasive that every single detail of King's itinerary was studied to the point where the FBI not only knew what hotel or motel King would be staying at, but the actual room number that King would occupy. Hotel officials proved eager to pre-arrange every nuance to satisfy Hoover's FBI, and since they betrayed King's assigned accommodations prior to his arrival, FBI agents would move in right next door and set up their surveillance equipment after having planted bugs in King's room. Shamelessly exploiting the prestige that Hoover's FBI commanded, even hotel officials were turned into Hoover's private army of spies. On April 4, 1968, standing on the balcony of the Lorraine Motel in Memphis Tennesse, Martin Luther King was assassinated. According to Hoover's FBI, a lone drifter, James Earl Ray, fired a single shot from a second story window, two hundred and five feet away. According to credible, eyewitness testimony, the FBI evidence which links Ray to the crime is absolutely fraudulent. The FBI used the testimony of Charles Stephens, a drunk who linked Ray to the crime in a bid to collect reward money. But according to Grace Walden, Stephens' common law wife: "Charlie Stephens was dead drunk the day Martin Luther King was shot. And he can't see too good anyway, and he didn't have his glasses on."6 Grace further indicates that Ray was not even at the roominghouse at the time of the shooting. That alone, proves that the FBI version of the King shooting is fraudulent. In July of 1968, Grace was locked away in a mental institution -one could almost see that coming. Indeed, anyone who did not cooperate with the FBI was probably insane. A simple woman who was easily manipulated by the power of the federal government, the integrity of Grace Stephens has never been legitimately compromised. In her own words, the facts are very simple: "I was locked up in an insane asylum for eleven years of misery for saying it wasn't James Earl Ray. And it was not James Earl Ray."7 One cannot help but admire the strength and the perseverance of this simple woman. Who knows what kind of hell she had to endure because of the bigotry and the outright crime that Hoover's FBI engaged -shock therapy, sedation? At any rate, her claim that the FBI used a fraudulent witness to blame Ray is clearly verified. James McGraw, a cab driver who went to pick up Stephens on the day King died said: "I got orders... Pick up old Charlie up in his room... And I go upstairs, and he was just drunk. He couldn't even get off the bed and I wouldn't haul him... He was just drunk. He couldn't see nothing. He didn't know nothing... All he wanted was that reward."8 A third witness corroborates the fact that the FBI witness was a fraud. According to the first reporter on the scene, Charlie Stephens was too intoxicated to identify anyone. Indeed, Charlie Stephens was such an unreliable witness that he was even denied reward money. Like the convenient "sniper's nest" at the Texas School Book Depository, the evidence which incriminates Ray reflects a transparent fraud. The bundle of Ray's belongings, found by the police a minute after the shooting [save for a stroke of luck, they almost found it before the shooting] contained binoculars, beer cans, a rifle, a box of bullets, shaving cream, a hammer, a radio.. dozens of pieces of "overkill" evidence -all containing Ray's fingerprints on them. Harold Weisberg, one of the most intelligent authorities on both the King and Kennedy assassinations, defined the self-incriminating bundle of "evidence" in the following terms. Now there is only one thing that makes sense. That package was dropped before the shot was fired. That package was left there to incriminate Ray and with a bird in the hand they weren't about to beat the bushes. 9 James Earl Ray, the man who was accused with murdering King was a two-bit hoodlum who had settled on a career of petty crime. On April 24, 1967, he broke out or he was allowed to escape from Missouri State penitentiary and headed to Canada where he was befriended by a man who called himself Raul. A shiftless criminal and burglar who had spent most of his life in jail, Ray was the easiest person in the world to control. All one had to do was to give him some money and instructions and he'd do his best to follow through. He didn't shoot Martin Luther King, but he is a criminal who facilitated the cover up plot, and in that respect the FBI cannot be blamed for locking him up and throwing away the key. The only lapse is that Hoover and his cohorts deserve the very same fate. The murder of Robert Kennedy reflects what is probably the most transparent conspiracy to cover up the truth than any other political assassination. Ironically, it is also the most difficult one to believe. It is difficult to comprehend the fact that Sirhan Sirhan, a hypnotically induced scapegoat, was brainwashed and programmed to fire a gun into a crowd of people, for the purpose of diverting attention. But that is the only logical conclusion that all the expert testimony which surrounds the assassination of Robert Kennedy leads to -there is no other alternative. And it is not a theory, it is not a movie plot, it is not a fantasy, it is the national security-motivated intelligence operation which claimed the life of the man who would have probably become the President of the United States. The motivation to murder Robert Kennedy was too absolutely compelling to preclude the existence of a plot. In the first place, the assassination of John F. Kennedy demanded an ongoing cover up and another Kennedy in the White House would have seriously jeopardized the effort. Secondly, repeated efforts to destroy his reputation through derogatory fictions had failed and Robert Kennedy was developing the very same hated gualities that fanatics attributed to Martin Luther King. Thirdly, Hoover hated him as much if not more than he hated King, and when Robert Kennedy said, "I do not run for the presidency to oppose any man, but to propose new policy," Hoover invariably saw "better Dead than Red" all over. The physical evidence which proves that Sirhan Sirhan did not murder Robert Kennedy is conclusive. William Harper, a highly educated, intelligent criminalist proved, beyond the slightest doubt, that it was not Sirhan Sirhan but a conspiracy which claimed the life of Robert F. Kennedy. Harper carefully reviewed the evidence introduced at the trial of Sirhan Sirhan, including the Sirhan weapon, the bullets, the shell cases, the autopsy report, and the autopsy photographs, and proved that Sirhan Sirhan was clearly not responsible for murdering Robert Kennedy. In particular, he conclusively proved that it was physically impossible for Sirhan Sirhan to have fired the fatal shot which claimed the life of Senator Kennedy. Every single witness confirmed the fact that Sirhan Sirhan unloaded his gun from a firing position directly in front of the Senator. The fatal shot however was fired, not by a crazed gunman face-to-face with the Senator but by someone who, almost in direct body contact with Kennedy, directed the barrel of a gun and "fired [muzzle] from one to three inches from the Senator's head."10 Sirhan Sirhan was tackled and denied the opportunity to get anywhere near position to be able to touch Robert Kennedy. William W. Harper, an honest, dedicated criminalist who, over a period of 35 years, had handled hundreds of cases involving firearms in homicides, suicides and accidents, could not have possibly been mistaken because the implications of the provable conclusions which relate to the Robert Kennedy assassination are very definite and not subject to credible dispute. For seven years, Harper had been a forensic science consultant to the Pasadena Police Department, and he had testified as a consulting criminalist in the courts of California, Washington, Oregon, Texas, Nevada, and Utah. After a careful examination of the evidence, he was certainly qualified to determine the simple fact that Sirhan Sirhan could not be connected to the fatal shots that claimed the life of Robert Kennedy. Indeed, the evidence is all so very clear and controversy-free that all four shots, the fatal penetration to the brain, the shot that passed through the right shoulder pad of the Senator's coat, and two additional bullets that entered the Senator's body were all fired from the back and all produced powder residue patterns which indicated that they were all fired from a distance of only a few inches.11 Six people, including Robert Kennedy, were shot in a crossfire that involved at least two guns and the powder residue patterns of every other single victim reflected the fact that only Robert Kennedy was repeatedly targeted and shot from point-blank range. Under these circumstances, lame duck suggestions like a person attempting to stop Sirhan Sirhan accidentally shot Robert Kennedy, do not wash because the assassin was in direct body contact with the Senator and if he wanted to shoot Sirhan he would have simply "extended his arm beyond the Senator and fired directly at Sirhan."12 In short, there is no room for an aspiring Posner to come on like a pompous know-it-all and to discount the credible work of competent experts like William Turner. The fact that Sirhan Sirhan did not touch the gun which was used to assassinate Robert Kennedy is absolutely indisputable. Seven bullets were physically removed from six of the victims. At the very least, three other bullets were conclusively identified, one pierced ceiling panels, one was imbedded in a doorjamb, and one was lodged in the centre divider of two swinging doors. That makes a total of at least ten bullets. Sirhan's revolver did not take any more than eight bullets and he did not re-load. And unless a Posner-like fraud artist develops the arrogance to claim that sophisticated computer technology can now prove that seven bullets plus three bullets is equal to eight, it is not possible to even suggest that Sirhan Sirhan assassinated Robert Kennedy. Coroner Dr. Thomas Noguchi, who performed the autopsy declared that all three bullets entered from the rear and indicated that "the fatal bullet was fired at less than one inch from the head and no less than two to three inches behind the right ear.13 Sirhan Sirhan never got that close. The verdict which determined that Sirhan Sirhan acted alone is clearly a product of "American Grotesque" or the corrupt, Garrison-like manipulation of legal and political resources. The evidence which has sustained the verdict for so long, is entirely fictional and emotional -there is not a single shred of physical evidence to back it up. When you have conclusive evidence of an apparent madman unloading a gun into a crowd of people, what you have effectively produced is a convincing "psychological smokescreen" -a powerful illusion. Because when Sirhan Sirhan frantically unloaded his revolver into a crowd of people, he and he alone created all the fear and all the pandemonium, and it is therefore natural to assume that he and he alone is responsible for the murder of Robert Kennedy. But when the bullet that hit Kennedy does not even ballistically match his own gun, the peculiar modus operandi of the Robert Kennedy assassination is quite clear. Sirhan Sirhan did not murder Robert Kennedy. He simply fired in the direction of a crowd and created the pandemonium which focused upon the mistaken assumption that he was the murderer. The bizarre "curve" of the Robert Kennedy assassination is that Sirhan Sirhan was a hypnotically manufactured scapegoat. All the testimony, all the experts and all the evidence converges towards the astounding fact that Sirhan Sirhan had "handlers" who had hypnotized him and had him respond to a hypnotically induced cue. Sirhan Sirhan's "on cue" response was to fire his gun in a crowded area, while the real assassin casually aimed, pulled the trigger and shot Robert Kennedy from point-blank range. It is indeed difficult to accept the notion of such a bizarre conspiratorial plot, but the evidence is too specific to lead to any other credible conclusion. The operational use of hypnosis was a longstanding CIA concern in the quest to produce the perfect, untraceable, covert operative. As early as 1950, Sheffield Edwards, a former Army colonel who was latter connected to the so-called CIA/Mafia operations, developed a secret project code named BLUEBIRD, to research the potential application of mind-control. Initially set up as a tool of interrogation, teams of psychiatrists, polygraph experts trained in hypnosis and technicians joined the CIA's behaviour-control program. By 1951, a famed psychiatrist whose identity the CIA protected, reported that electroshock treatments provided the opportunity to "make patients talk" as they came out of the stupor that followed shock treatments.1 4 Moreover, researchers experimented with taking advantage of the "groggy" period following electroshock to gain hypnotic control of the patient. The CIA backed psychiatrists developed cold-blooded, repugnant schemes like the following proposed experiment: The psychiatrist also mentioned that continued electroshock treatments could gradually reduce a subject to the "vegetable level" and that these treatments could not be detected unless the subject was given EEC tests within two weeks.. Allen noted that portable, battery-driven electroshock machines had come on the market. 15 There was absolutely no limit to the scientific perversions that American intelligence agencies contemplated: In 1952 the Office of Scientific Intelligence proposed giving another private doctor $100,000 to develop BLUEBIRD related "neurosurgical techniques" -presumably lobotomy-connected. 16 Of all the repulsive mind-control schemes, the preoccupation of the CIA's first behavioral research Czar, Morse Allen, was the power of hypnosis. In 1954, Allen simulated the ultimate experiment in hypnosis, the creation of a "Manchurian Candidate," or a programmed assassin. The plot sounds like the stuff of strange fiction, so it is perhaps prudent to quote directly from a thoroughly researched, work of non-fiction. Allen's "victim" was a secretary whom he put into a deep trance and told her to keep sleeping until he ordered otherwise. He then hypnotized a second secretary and told her that if she could not wake up her friend, "her rage would be so great that she would not hesitate to kill." Allen left a pistol nearby, which the secretary had no way of knowing was unloaded. Even though she had earlier expressed a fear of firearms of any kind, she picked up the gun and "shot" her sleeping friend. After Allen brought the "killer" out of her trance, she had apparent amnesia for the event, denying she would shoot anyone.17 The experiments of ORD, the Office of Research and Development were just as sinister in their implications. The search for a compound to induce a heart attack or a stroke in a targeted individual or inducing amnesia through psychosurgery, are certainly not your normal, run-of-the-mill scientific experiments. Inducing amnesia involved a precisely placed electrode probe which "could be used to cut the link between past memory and present recall."1 8 In the light of the sinister plots that American intelligence contemplated, the claim that Sirhan Sirhan was a hypnoprogrammed scapegoat, is strangely realistic. When intelligence agencies waste millions and millions of dollars of research on bizarre, sinister proposals, the suggestion that the research was not exploited is quite inconceivable. The verdict in the quest to determine whether Sirhan Sirhan was a Manchurian Candidate-style scapegoat is certainly unanimous. Indeed, the experts who have examined Sirhan Sirhan concur with the claim that he is in fact a victim of hypnosis. When experts like Dr. Eduard Simson-Kallas, chief of the prison's psychological testing program, indicate that Sirhan Sirhan was evidently a Manchurian Candidate, there is certainly no credible reason to believe otherwise. In the words of Dr. Simson-Kallas: He was easily influenced, had no real roots and was looking for a cause.. The Arab-Israeli conflict could easily have been used to motivate him.. He was prepared by someone. He was hypnotized by someone.19 Indeed, it is simply not possible to make sense out of the entire Sirhan Sirhan puzzle unless one accepts the fact that he was In a trance when he unloaded his gun into the crowd that surrounded Robert Kennedy. The following "meaningless" trance-like babble discovered in Sirhan Sirhan's notebook is certainly consistent to the claim that Sirhan Sirhan was hypnoprogrammed. In his own handwriting, Sirhan Sirhan scribbled "deadline" threats like: REK must die- RFK must be killed Robert F. Kennedy must be assasinated RFK must be assasinated RFK must be assasinated... Robert F. Kennedy must be assasinated before 5 June 68 Robert F. Kennedy must be assasinated... Dr. Simson-Kallas noted that although Sirhan was resigned to the belief that he had murdered Robert Kennedy, he spoke as though he was "reciting from a book" and that clearly indicated that Sirhan was not an ordinary criminal who was able to detail the crime. In the words of Simson: A psychologist always looks for details. If a person is involved in a real situation, there are details.20 Dr. John W. Heisse, Jr. explains the significance of the unreal situation that obviously motivated Sirhan when he said: Sirhan kept repeating certain phrases. This clearly revealed that he had been programmed to put himself in trance. This is something he couldn't have learned by himself. Someone had to show him and teach him how.21 And so, having been programmed to go into a trance, Sirhan could be controlled on demand. All that his programmers had to do was to introduce a prearranged triggering mechanism and Sirhan Sirhan would respond as trained. As Dr. Simson explains, "You can be programmed that if you meet a certain person or see something specific, then you go into trance."22 Potential leads in the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy are so solid, that even the man who is evidently responsible for hypnotizing Sirhan is not a mystery. A passage in the notebook of Sirhan suggests that William Joseph Bryan, Jr., was hired to hypnotize him. The "incriminating" passage reads: "God help me... please help me. Salvo Di Di Salvo Die S Salvo." Albert Di Salvo was the notorious Boston Strangler, and Dr. William Joseph Bryan, Jr., of Los Angeles was the hypnotist who cracked the case. During the Korean war, he had put his skills to work on what he called the "chief of all medical survival training for the United States Air Force". After the war he was reportedly a CIA consultant in the Agency's experimentation with mind control and behaviour modification.23 Hours after Robert Kennedy was shot, "Bryan appeared on the Los Angeles radio program of Ray Briem KABC and offhandedly commented that the suspect probably acted under posthypnotic suggestion".24 A braggart like Bryan never failed to let it out one way or another. In 1974, when Betsy Langman, a disarmingly attractive New York writer interviewed Bryan, he could not contain self-congratulatory gestures and praised himself in terms like: "I am probably the leading expert in the world. I can hypnotize everybody in this office in less than five minutes". When she asked him about the possibility of Sirhan having been hypnotized, "his expansiveness vanished" and he said, "I'm not going to comment on that case, because I didn't hypnotize him". When Langman explained that she merely wanted his opinion, he exploded: "You are going around trying to find some more ammunition to put out that same old crap, that people can be hypnotized into doing all these weird things".25 Bryan was as defensive as he would have been if he had hypnotized Sirhan himself. In 1969, the California Board of Medical examiners found him guilty of sexually molesting women who submitted under hypnosis. Strangely, Bryan received an emergency call minutes after presidential candidate George Wallace was shot, and the call allegedly had something to do with the shooting.26 If that is true, then Nixon's re-election team was indeed busier than anyone imagined. If the murder of Robert Kennedy was an ordinary homicide, then security guard Eugine Cesar, would have been indicted for murder. As soon as he was shot Kennedy grabbed Cesar's snap-on tie from his neck, almost as though he had struggled to identify his murderer. According to a taped interview given immediately after the assassination, Cesar "was holding his arm when they shot [Robert Kennedy] him."27 In 1971, he changed his story to suit the claim that he got knocked down and didn't really know what was going on. Kennedy was murdered with a .22 revolver, and when Cesar was asked about whether he owned that type of a weapon, he lied and said he did not when in fact he sold his .22 calibre three months after the assassination.28 Cesar obviously despised the Kennedys, whom he called "crooks" and Donald Schulman, a reporter for KNXT-TV saw a security guard draw his gun and fire, but he naturally assumed that he was trying to hit Sirhan. Four eyewitnesses testified they saw Cesar fire a gun and he himself admitted he drew his weapon.29 Given the autopsy evidence which indicates that the muzzle of the gun was practically touching Kennedy's head, there were not too many people who got close enough to Kennedy to kill him in the manner in which he died. Moreover, given the fact that Cesar was so close to the Senator that he was holding him by the arm, if he didn't shoot Robert Kennedy, he should have chased down the person who did. The truth about the assassination of Robert Kennedy has been toyed to the point where it is now up to historians to determine the final verdict. The constant manipulation of the evidence to make it appear as if it is not possible to prove that Sirhan Sirhan's gun was not the murder weapon, has been exhaustive. In 1975, the New York Times reported that a panel of experts unanimously agreed that there is no evidence that a second gun was used in the assassination. The reason given: deterioration of bullets: therefore not possible to prove. There is no end to the rhetorically engineered excuses which can be manufactured to keep the truth as vague as possible. Any panel of experts can be manipulated or presented with tampered or even fraudulent evidence. What the experts cannot do is retrieve the 2,400 missing pictures from the RFK file or the ceiling tiles and the doorjambs which were destroyed after the assassination. Regardless, surviving photographs, the evidence that independent researchers have exposed and eyewitness statements have provided a vivid enough portrait to prove beyond any doubt at all, that Sirhan Sirhan's weapon is not responsible for the murder of Robert Kennedy. It would take some new incredible fraud to prove otherwise, and despite the fact that much of the evidence has been destroyed, the Robert Kennedy assassination cover up is too obvious to accept the fraudulent cover story -that Sirhan Sirhan shot Robert Kennedy. He did not. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2E ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1Jim Garrison, A Heritage of Stone, p. 147. 2Frontline, The Secret File on J. Edgar Hoover, written and directed by William Cran. 3The JFK Assassination, the Jim Garrison Tapes, A John Barbour Film. 4The Final Assassinations Report: Report of the Select Connittee on Assassinations, U.S. House of Representatives, introduction by Robert Blakey. 5Arts & Entortainment Channel, Jack Anderson: JFK, the Mob and Me, November 5, 1994. 6Grace Stephens Interview, Who Killed Martin Luther King?, Unanswered questions surrounding the civil rights leader's 1968 assassination. January 22, 1993. 7Ibid. 8James McGraw Interview, Who Killed Martin Luther King?, Unanswered questions surrounding the civil riqhts leader's 1968 assassination, Janaary 22, 1993. 9Harold Weisberg, Who Killed Martin Luther King?, Unanswered questions surrounding the civil riqhts leader's 1968 assassination, Janaary 22, 1993. 10William Turner and John Christian, The Assassination of John F. Kennedy, A searching Look at the Conspiracy and Cover-up, Appendix 379. 11Ibid. 12Ibid. 13Ibid., p.162. 14John Marks, The Search the Manchurian Candidate, The CIA and Mind Control, p.28. 15Ibid. 16Ibid. 17Ibid., p.195. 18Ibid. p.225. 19William Turner and John Christian, The Assassination of Robert F. Kennedy, A Searching Look at the Conspiracy and Cover-up, p.199. 20Ibid., p.200. 21Ibid., p.211. 22Ibid., p.200. 23Ibid., p.226. 24Ibid., p.226. 25Ibid., p.227. 26Ibid., p.228. 27Ibid., p.167. 28Ibid., p.165-66. 29The Globe and Mail, June 3, 1988, p.A-7. ----- Aloha, He'Ping, Om, Shalom, Salaam. Em Hotep, Peace Be, All My Relations. Omnia Bona Bonis, Adieu, Adios, Aloha. Amen. Roads End <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
