Robert Kennedy was shot on June 5 and died June 6, 1968, fifty years ago today. A new examination of evidence is forcing human rights organizations — including the OAS— to consider probing the case.
By Dr. William Pepper and Andrew Kreig
Recent news about Robert F. Kennedy’s fatal shooting sharpens the challenge for human rights organizations in how to address the shocking justice issues raised by the continued imprisonment of RFK’s convicted slayer Sirhan Sirhan.
Reporters and researchers have recently shown the disturbing pattern of suppressed evidence and other legal irregularities that led to Sirhan’s 1969 murder conviction after his scanty defense at trial.
On Sunday, May 26, The Washington Post published a front-page story by Tom Jackman headlined Who killed Bobby Kennedy? His son RFK Jr. doesn’t believe it was Sirhan Sirhan.
The report constituted a breakthrough for a mainstream news organization, particularly because the article extensively examined scientific and other evidence supporting Sirhan’s innocence.
The official story is that Sirhan was a Kennedy-hating killer who acted alone to kill the senator at the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles following RFK’s speech thanking his supporters for victory in the 1968 California Democratic presidential primary.
More than any other mainstream media journalist, the Post’s Jackman delved in depth into the evidence in both that first story and in a follow up on June 4, Was Sirhan Hypnotically Programmed to Assassinate RFK? Jackman, while presenting diverse views in a professional manner, clearly showed anyone with an open mind that important evidence has been withheld and that Sirhan may well have been a victim of CIA MK Ultra mind control efforts with the goal of setting Sirhan up to be a patsy through the use of hypnosis and chemicals.
Many other researchers such as filmmaker, author and professor Shane O’Sullivan have shown that Sirhan’s role was to perform a distraction so that the real assassin could do his work and put three bullets into RFK’s body at much closer range while Sirhan was always three to five feet in from of the senator, according to eye witnesses.
It is now up to human rights organizations to step up to the challenge of confronting evidence that the United States and its vaunted legal system may have wrongfully convicted on murder charges and kept imprisoned in near solitary confinement a defendant in one of the most notorious U.S. murders in modern times.
An International Case
This challenge is particularly acute for the Inter-American Human Rights Council (IAHRC) of the 35-nation Organization of American States (OAS).
Last July, Sirhan acting through his attorneys, filed a 200-page petition to IAHRC seeking the first real evidentiary hearing ever on his case. This would address for the first time the scientific and other evidence showing that he could not have fired the shots that killed Kennedy in the hotel’s kitchen pantry after the senator left the speaking stage.
The defense has exhausted direct legal appeal avenues in the United States without ever having the opportunity to have a hearing on the enormous and important evidence showing Sirhan’s likely innocence. Few alternatives are left. But Article 18 of the Declaration of Human Rights under the OAS Treaty, requires a fair trial. Clearly, Sirhan did not have a fair trial and experience shows that he has little or no chance of getting one in the U.S.
Yet this is a particularly sensitive case for human rights organizations and personnel, whether public or private. On the one hand, it’s exactly the type of injustice that those with a calling for this work should want to examine, particularly because the murder victim, RFK, is still so widely admired and the accused, Sirhan, has from the first been dubbed a pariah.
Other the other hand, the current target of the inquiry is inevitably the U.S. justice system and by implication the government, NGO, media and academics (not to mention intelligence services) that have allegedly allowed any injustices to fester for decades. Any aggressive, independent investigators face not only potential funding and other career disincentives, but the possibility of cognitive dissonance. That discomforting affliction can easily occur if a leading global beacon for “rule of law” falls woefully short of basic legal standards in one of its most important crime cases in living memory.
Regarding Sirhan’s Petition No. IACHR – 0000038395, an IACHR spokesperson commented in early May, with no update in time for this column: “The petition is still in preliminary study. This means there is no information whatsoever of public character on this petition that I can share.”
Kennedy Jr. Calls for New Probe
RFK Jr.: Sirhan did not kill my father. (Photo: Waterkeeper Alliance)
Jackman, a Post reporter covering law enforcement since 1998, obtained this scoop: Kennedy Jr. decided to go public after spending months re-examining the evidence and meeting in prison with Sirhan Sirhan.
“I got to a place where I had to see Sirhan,” Kennedy told Jackman.
“I went there because I was curious and disturbed by what I had seen in the evidence,” said Kennedy, an environmental lawyer and the third oldest of his father’s 11 children. “I was disturbed that the wrong person might have been convicted of killing my father. My father was the chief law enforcement officer in this country. I think it would have disturbed him if somebody was put in jail for a crime they didn’t commit.”
More than any other mainstream media journalist, Jackman has delved deeply into the evidence of the case related to Sirhan’s alleged guilt. He has clearly shown that evidence was withheld and that Sirhan was selected as a victim of CIA MK Ultra mind control efforts to be set up as a patsy through the use of hypnosis and chemicals.
Jackman and O’Sullivan have quoted Harvard Medical School Professor Dr. Daniel P. Brown, an expert in forensic psychiatry and hypnosis. Brown extensively interviewed Sirhan and also studied the MK Ultra program.
O’Sullivan’s June 5 piece, which appeared on the investigative online site WhoWhatWhy, contains a 67-minute video with hypnosis experts — including excerpts from six hours with Brown — that Netflix spiked entirely from its recent documentary Bobby Kennedy For President.
Conventional wisdom holds that reporters, editors and their news outlets always seek to publish verifiable information challenging the power structure, especially for suspected misconduct in something like a high-profile murder case.
But the track record on truly sensitive topics is less than impressive if new reporting undermines decades of previous coverage and longstanding relationships between the press and powerful sources.
The Post ran other piece on RFK that upheld the conventional wisdom. A Post Sunday Magazine, What is it like to be the brother of Robert Kennedy’s assassin? The life of the other Sirhan, accepts Sirhan’s guilt with scant attempt to explore the possibility of his innocence. And then on June 5, Post editorial board member and op-ed columnist Charles Lane dismissed any new evidence or calls for a new investigation as crackpot ideas unworthy of discussion except (apparently) to insult those proposing them.
A Kennedy Family Divide
Kathleen Kennedy Townsend: Agrees with her brother on new probe. (Photo by James Tourtellotte, Wikimedia Commons.)
The Boston Globe, New England’s largest circulation newspaper, followed up Jackman’s May 26 scoops by reporting on May 31 that the late senator’s oldest child, former Maryland Lt. Gov. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, has been persuaded by her brother to join in seeking a new investigation of the murder.
But the Globe story, RFK’s children divided over calls for a fresh investigation of his assassination by Michael Levenson, also reported that two other children of the slain senator said this week that they opposed a re-investigation. Levenson reported that this opposition underscores “how divisive the second-gunman theory continues to be, a half-century after the presidential candidate, former attorney general, and senator from New York, was killed in the pantry of the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles.”
The two children objecting to a new investigation are former Massachusetts Congressman Joseph P. Kennedy II and Kerry Kennedy, who is president of a human rights organization named for her father. The irony is striking. The head of the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Foundation opposes a new investigation into alleged human rights violations that allegedly protected his murderer.
A version of this article was originally published on the Justice Integrity Project website.
Dr. William F. Pepper is a human rights lawyer most known for his defense of James Earl Ray in the trial for the murder of Martin Luther King Jr. and of Sirhan Sirhan in the trial for the murder of Senator Robert F. Kennedy. Pepper is the author of “The Plot To Kill King” (Skyhorse Publishing, 2016), the final volume of a trilogy.
Andrew Kreig is a Washington, DC-based investigative reporter, non-profit executive, attorney and author. He edits the non-partisan Justice Integrity Project, which has published separate “Readers Guides” to the MLK, RFK and JFK assassinations.
An excellent review of RFKjr’s new book at this link:
http://edwardcurtin.com/american-values-lessons-i-learned-from-my-family-by-robert-f-kennedy-jr-a-review/
Well, his son wrote a book of dreck about his dad and uncle: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2426903280
I think it’s unfair to expect the family to be onboard. It’s so painful for them, and it takes a long time to understand the evidence, and they have other things they are doing with their lives that help the world in their own way.
I’m super grateful to have made Bobby’s acquaintance and to have been able to share some of the data from my new upcoming book, A Lie Too Big to Fail, about how the police and DA’s office worked in concert with Sirhan’s “defense” team to hide the truth in this case. Bobby Kennedy Jr. has always seemed the most like his father, so his entry into this case has been especially gratifying. But please understand that the others barely knew their father (and Rory never even got to meet him, since she was not yet born when RFK was killed). It hurts me when I see people put the family down without fully understanding the grief they already face on this subject.
By “barely knew” I mean only that they were so young when he died – they didn’t have time to grow up with him.
“I think it’s unfair to expect the family to be onboard. It’s so painful for them, and it takes a long time to understand the evidence”
YES – very unfair. But now only the family can give momentum to getting widespread exposure on this 50 y.o. conundrum. RFK, Jr and KKT are to be commended.
“The guard definitely pulled out his gun and fired.” – Don Schulman.
For many years JFK’s correspondence & files on the Israeli Nuclear “Dimona” program were kept SEALED from researchers or painstakingly buried by “interested parties” in the “interests & futherance of National Security”.
In July 2004 the Israeli whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu claimed in the London-based Al-Hayat newspaper that the State of Israel was complicit in the assassination of John F. Kennedy. He claimed there were “near-certain indications” that Kennedy was assassinated in response to “pressure he exerted on Israel’s then head of government, David Ben-Gurion, to shed light on Dimona’s nuclear reactor”
The Missing Link In The JFK Assassination Conspiracy.
http://www.rense.com/general42/enemies.htm
Israeli historian Avner Cohen’s book, Israel and the Bomb, confirms the conflict between JFK and Israel so powerfully that, Israel’s Ha’aretz, declared Cohen’s revelations would “necessitate the rewriting of Israel’s entire history.” From Israel’s perspective, writes Cohen, “Kennedy’s demands [on Israel] seemed diplomatically inappropriate…inconsistent with national sovereignty.” In any case, Cohen pointed out, “the transition from Kennedy to [Lyndon] Johnson…benefited the Israeli nuclear program.”
Ethan Bronner, in the New York Times, called Israel’s drive to build a nuclear bomb “a fiercely hidden subject.” This explains why JFK researchers-and Jim Garrison-never considered an Israeli.
While all of this presents a strong motive for Israel to strike against JFK, even maverick Israeli journalist Barry Chamish acknowledges that there exists “a pretty cogent case” for Mossad collaboration with the CIA in the assassination conspiracy.
https://www.facts-are-facts.com/article/hushed-up-the-missing-link-to-jfk-assassination
According to Fletcher Prouty cia conducted a terror campaign in N. Vietnam which resulted in 1000000 refugees moved by US ships and planes to the South. He quotes Ike as vehemently opposed to a land war in Asia. JFK signed a NSAM saying all troops out by1965. Revoking JFK’s NSAM
was one of the first actions taken by LBJ upon assuming office.
Jim Douglas also points out several other policy decisions disagreeable to the cia/mic eg back channel talks with Kruschev, nuclear test ban treaty, nixing operation Northwoods, cutting oil depletion allowance, backing down US Steel on their price hike
Wm. Engdahl points out JFK had the treasury issue silver certificates a move presumably not too popular at the fed.
It seems to me he made multiple decisions based on two key misunderstandings 1 the president runs the country and 2 he should do so for the benefit of the people who live here.
Interesting Conspiracy theory here of at least another one reason why JFK was killed? Your referring to JFK’s executive order 11110 regarding the issue of silver certificates which he implemented via that executive order with the goal of reigning in the power of the Federal Reserve by transferring that power from the Fed to the US Department of Treasury? This would have been achieved by replacing the Federal Reserve notes with the silver certificates! History has shown that Kennedy was a significant danger to the Political establishment, the MIC & Banking elites as well as others, so he couldn’t be allowed to endanger these powerful interests & needed to be eliminated by any means possible? Sadly, his assasination was the most graphic & horrific public murder by evil people who will rot in hell for this crime?
Trumps no fool Jeff? He’s done the exact opposite of draining the swamp, reversed course & backed down from his campaign rhetoric? And in fact has hired the deepstate swamp creatures he vowed to destroy, since he’s got into the Whitehouse? And because of this subservience & obedience to the Deepstate he will never be impeached or assassinated? Trump might have a bad hairdo but he’s not a idiot & doesn’t want to end up in a modern day Zapruder day film replay of JFK?
Great article Dr. Pepper and Andrew.
This is the shocker: “He [ has clearly shown that evidence was withheld and that Sirhan was selected as a victim of CIA MK Ultra mind control efforts…” What a program with alumni like James “Whitey” Bulger and Ted Kaczynski. I hope investigators are able to find some hard evidence on this or other criminal activity coming out of this program before the original researchers age-out of life on this planet. There were psychiatrists who tried to expose this program and were labeled ‘conspiracy nuts,’ an example of projection no doubt.
Readers will be very interested in this very detailed article at Unz: Did Israel Kill the Kennedys?
I will put the link in a reply comment below.
Link to the article at Unz: http://www.unz.com/article/did-israel-kill-the-kennedies/
Many Thanks Sam F.
Thank you Sam F for the excellent link & here is another.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlsn01eYsmA&t…=
.
What will RFK Jr’s response be when he finds so many threads leading to Mossad/Israel?
Must-read.
Although Guyenot appears to discount the possible involvement of the CIA in Dallas, the CIA had plenty of motivation of get rid of JFK—before he had the chance to “smash [the CIA] into a thousand pieces.”
Guyenot also ignores James Douglass’s evidence that an earlier plot (three weeks earlier) was aborted—this might point to CIA involvement. I speculate that the CIA had the greatest motivation, the Texas law had the best opportunity, and the Mossad provded the means (maybe with the help of Meyer Lansky—the Israel-Cuba connection).
Guyenot is right about one thing for sure: ” Only when the American public at large come to grips with the truth of their deaths and honor their legacy and sacrifice will America have a chance to be redeemed and be great again.”
This country is in a prolonged state of denial and PTSD ever since Dallas. 911 is part of the syndrome: Half of Americans do not believe the “official” story, but our news media continue to obfuscate—as with the JFK and RFK murders.
“From Wikipedia; Sirhan was born in Jerusalem in Mandatory Palestine to a Christian family of Greek Orthodox background, although he attended a Lutheran school.[1][2] In 1989, he told David Frost, “My only connection with Robert Kennedy was his sole support of Israel and his deliberate attempt to send those 50 [fighter jet] bombers to Israel to obviously do harm to the Palestinians.”[3] Some scholars believe that the assassination was the first major incident of political violence in the United States stemming from the Arab–Israeli conflict in the Middle East.[4]”
That is the explanation I heard at the time and am curious why it was rejected by those suggesting that it was something else.
Did Sirhan Sirhan deny he did it? An honest question and I don’t now the answer. Why would he make the statement attributed to him above.
As a recall, the trial was over quickly with little discussion at the time of motive, which given media dishonesty on matters relating to Israel, is understandable.
Herman, motive is irrelevant to establishing guilt for a crime, but I am sure you know that, and why you used it as a gambit. Only physical evidence matters. The RFK kill shot was behind the right ear, with the muzzle of the gun no more than two inches away, and likely in “contact range”. Sirhan Sirhan was in front of, and five feet away from RFK. Therefore it is impossible for Sirhan to have fired the kill shot.
Supposedly RFK ran for president at least in part so he could have the power to find out the truth about his brother’s murder. “They got him!” were also supposedly the first words RFK and Jackie Kennedy exchanged after the assassination. JFK was not unaware of the CIA’s efforts against him. Eleven days before his death he took an important policy conversation with Senator Wayne Morse outdoors into the Rose Garden because he suspected the CIA had bugged the White House
An investigation by the OAS might get to the truth? This is worse than delusional. Before I decided to post a comment on this, just did a quick check on the most recent actions of OAS. This must fall in the same category of Trump claiming that he can pardon himself. OAS is an instrument of US hegemony. It has always been thus. Look at the two major SA players there – Brazil and Argentina – if anything more completely corrupt and dysfunctional that the US, which in itself is hard to comprehend.
Not to mention: critical evidence removed and quite probably destroyed.
By the way: that famous quote from JFK about those that would prevent peaceful progress inviting violent revolution was made in a prepared address by JFK to SA business leaders in a now defunct OAS type cooperative business consortium.
OAS: Office of Assassination Studies
You don’t need to invoke hypnosis and drugs, and you don’t need to add extra junk like a second gunman. CIA and FBI are masters at cultivating “terrorists” through ordinary conversation and guidance. We’ve seen HUNDREDS of examples of the technique over the last 60 years.
When you bring in unnecessary details you mess up your own credibility. CIA and FBI are also experts at pushing “conspiracists” into bizarre and unnecessary theories. Plain observed reality is ALWAYS enough to disprove official explanations.
Very good point that whoever the shooters were, this does not require the hypnosis nor the lone-nut hypotheses. Likely the shooter(s) did not act alone, but were motivated or loosely supported by larger organizations.
Reading through these comments, it seems as though a couple of folks think Sirhan had time to “reload”. Seriously though, the “big lie” is sustainable even if the minimum doubt can be successfully reintroduced each time the topic arises. Many thanks to these authors for pushing back with the truth.
The biggest bump in the road is getting beyond the label of ‘conspiracy nut’ or ‘theorist’ to be nice.
I dimly remember that the Sheriff of LA country had refused a security detail for Kennedy for that night. Does anyone know if that’s true?
Sincere question: I’m trying to understand the second gunman theory. The real killer shot RFK in the head from no more than 1.5 inches away?
This is discussed specifically in an interview with renowned forensic pathologist Cyril Wecht, who was a personal friend of Thomas Noguchi, the coroner who did the autopsy on RFK. Wecht was an authority on the JFK evidence, and Noguchi called Wecht for advice on how to avoid having the RFK autopsy hijacked, as the JFK autopsy had been.
http://www.c-span.org/video/?321702-2/medical-aspects-kennedy-assassinations
A quick summary of the RFK assassination controvery is at
https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Robert_Kennedy_Assassination.html
How the RFK assassination is related to the JFK assassination is discussed at
http://warprofiteerstory.blogspot.com
Thanks. It seems to me that if this is true, it runs against the notion that this was a carefully planned, professional plot. Point blank shot to the neck with lots of people around, all focused on your intended victim, doesn’t seem the best way to plan to get away with murder (even using Sirhan as a distraction). So if there was a 2nd gunman, it doesn’t suggest a very careful or clever plot (by people powerful enough to get the LAPD to destroy or fake evidence, etc.).
Also, firing 5 shots (which the killer must have done, to reach the claimed total of 13) while standing next to your victim in this setting is a good way of calling attention to oneself, one would think.
This is the thing: Most of what I’ve read here and elsewhere questioning the received wisdom reads like memos that should be directed to Sirhan’s defense team: here’s a bunch of things that could be used as evidence to poke holes in the prosecution’s case, and create reasonable doubt. That’s fine, and it may well be that Sirhan did not receive a fair trial and that a full airing of the evidence would and should lead a jury to acquit.
But I expect more: Give me a theory or two of what might have really happened. One that plausibly fits the available evidence. (And please don’t accuse people who raise questions or disagreements of being government trolls. It’s not a good look.)
It was probably hastily planned compared to the JFK assassination. That was a textbook operation, according to an officer at the U.S Army assassination school. However, the RFK plan did include a patsy, and control over the trial and press coverage.
Kennedy entered the race late, so they didn’t have much time before he could possibly assume the reins of the presidency. Then he could re-open the JFK investigation, which was his intention according to close associates.
The Kennedy brothers emerged as a major roadblock to men planning needless, highly profitable war. A fairly concise background, with links to good source material, is in the JFK story at http://warprofiteerstory.blogspot.com
DDj-
I hope you aren’t too offended if your curiosity is sincere. Group think is an enemy of rational thought. I believe we should all follow the hard evidence wherever it leads, and in this case I believe that it leads to Sirhan’s being not guilty of RFK’s murder, and of a second gunman. As for calling attention to yourself, a crowd can actually work in your favor, since most people’s view would be blocked by others. The lack of a serious investigation being fully carried out and aired in court in 1968 is suspicious, to say the least. I’m going to put more time into following developments of this, and I hope you do to. I suggest we read Tate and Johnson’s new book to “get a theory or two of what might have really happened.”
You don’t have to have an alternative theory or suspect in order to question the first hypothesis and find that the evidence is not sufficient to convict the first suspect of murder.
The demand for an alternative hypoethesis before looking squarely at the evidenc that Shirhan may not be guilty is a typical troll gambit. It ignores actual evidence in favor of theoretical evidence.
Also, BTW, commenters on this thread don’t owe you, DDj, a thing, contrary to your “expectations.”
Yikes. Serious reading comprehension issues, combined with enormous chip on shoulder, make Litchfield a scary boy. I’ll walk out slowly, hands in the air. Please don’t shoot. As you were, all.
JWalters, thank you for that amazing video with Cyril Wecht, I’ve heard him speak so I know of his reputation but this is a truly stunning presentation. Many Tnanks.
The problem is the media. When our media can faithfully report that Assad gassed his own people two times immediately after Trump called for withdrawal of the US military in Syria based on two questionable gas attacks which make no sense because there is no motive for the crime by the accused yet the guilty verdict is given even before investigators have reached the site of the alleged crime and we launch cruise missiles in each case we see the kangaroo court of our media which is aligned with our MIC and which can turn the population on a dime because of our belief that the media is a true source of accurate information.
Our media is anything but a true and accurate source of information. They routinely lie to us and fabricate stories based on fake sources to weave a narrative convenient to their purpose.
In the case of the Syrian gas attacks the media overlooked the far more likely and plausible theory that the enemies of Assad would be the prime suspects and created a narrative against logic that Assad was responsible.
The manipulation played to the strategy which launched us into the conflict and in each case turned the tide of Trump’s movement away from the war in Syria and forced the US to reengage with missile strikes.
The media do this with alacrity and ease since they are controlled by a handful of giant multinational corporations which have only their profits for concerns. War and the interest created by war are good for business and good for American defense companies.
Russia Gate is another example of how peace gestures by the Trump administration resulted in propaganda wars against the Russians which continue unabated despite lack of any evidence. America’s defense industry depends on a steady diet of misinformation by the press to convince us we are under attack.
Hermann Goering under examination by lawyers at Nuremberg state clearly how the Nazis convinced the Germans to support war. He said ,”Naturally the common people don’t want war: Neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
So it is with any country including our own when the media convince us we are under attack. We will always follow.
Once we understand this simple mechanism provided by a propaganda state where there are no challenges to the theory that we are under attack because such discourse and examination of facts is not allowed by official policy then the simple mechanism to “drag the people along” works every time.
The tell tale signs of “dragging the people along” are always a quick verdict as to who the guilty party is. In the case of the Syrian gas attacks investigators were not even on the ground when the unanimous verdict that Assad was responsible were broadcasted far and wide followed by unanimous unquestioning support by many western governments. This was followed by cheers at the military response by the US across the entire western nations despite the complete lack of any motive assignable for the alleged crime. No one asked why Assad would gas his people multiple times on every announcement by the chief aggressor against his nation that we were giving up the fight and going home. It makes absolutely no sense.
Such is the power of a unified propaganda system which marches in locked step to perpetuate a lie.
Joseph Goebbels stated that the truth was the greatest enemy of the state. “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
Every time I go searching for these quotes the websites including Snopes claiming these are fake quotes keep cropping up like mushrooms after a July rain. More and more the propaganda state has to deny any analysis or quote or insight into the workings of the machine used by the Nazis and adopted by the US thus revealing the truthfulness of the statement “The Truth is the Greatest Enemy of the State”. They have a need to attack any truth about how propaganda works. Why does Snopes feel the need to attack these words and claim that they are fake and that websites claiming these truths are false? I am sure it is obvious.
It is also obvious to anyone that WWII happened and Germany threatened the entire World. Why the need to claim the Nazi leaders statements about how they accomplished that feat are all a pack of lies? Why indeed!
It should be obvious to all that the reason that they want to attack information revealing the mechanism of effective propaganda is because they want to successfully engage in it themselves. Erase history, call it all a pack of lies and go do the same thing all over again.
All this leads to the assassinations of JFK and RFK. It should be clear from current events that our media will absolutely lie to us, conjure up some scapegoat for their own purposes and conceal the real story again for their own purposes.
Although we may never know the orchestrators and perpetrators of these assassinations one thing is clear. Our Main Stream Media has a long history of concealing the truth and has every intention of continuing to do so.
The truth that the truth is the greatest enemy of the state is woven into the fabric of our unsolved history mired in conspiracy and filled with easy scapegoats that serve to hide the truth from all of us. The fact that it is so pervasive and has such a long history should be a cause for concern.
One thing you might consider is who has the interest and the ability and the power to cover up such crimes? You might consider the possibility that it is the guilty party.
Propaganda on US Citizens had been illegal shortly after WW2 up until 2013. When the Smith-Mundt Act (the propaganda ban on US citizens) was repealed in 2013, propaganda on Americans became legal. Corporate media now lies with impunity and is paid handsomely to do so. From 2006 to 2015, the US government spent an averaged $1 billion per year on public relations to sell Americans endless wars.
https://www.budget.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/GAO%20PR%20Agency%20Spending.pdf
CitizenOne – what a great post! Thank you. We must, though, by extension, also wonder what lies we were told about World War I and II, and I’m not talking about the quotes you cited above by Goering and Goebbels. There are certain aspects that we are not allowed to question. Why is that? Is it because “the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie”?
And the truth is that various competing groups of oligarchs that own and operate Empires (at our expense) foment wars (without our consent) to expand their territorial reign and increase their power. The truth is that people can coexist and cooperate in win-win activities ( such as the New Silk Road policies championed by China and, now, over half of the World) to the mutual benefit of the common people, if the oligarchs would not strenuously work to stop this process with the invention of phony enemies and phony wars. That’s it, in a nutshell.
When Goebbels spoke of “the big lie,” he referred to others using the technique.
“The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.”
His comments on war propaganda sound eerily like the MSM coverage of the war against Syria. He said the British claim:
“The Royal Air Force has pulverized Hamburg, destroyed every railroad station in Berlin, and left German war production in ruins, all the while never hitting a clinic, hospital, orphanage, old people’s home, or any kind of civilian target at all. The German Luftwaffe, on the other hand, has never been particularly interested in military or industrial targets. It is instead magnetically drawn to churches, schools, institutions for homeless children, and workers’ homes.”
ie. Raqqa v. Aleppo and Assad consistently gassing only civilians.
http://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/goeb29.htm
CitizenOne are you a teacher? If not you should be. The MSM would be my first choice if we were to start a reform movement. You are right the MSM is supportive of our MIC, and this is not a good two to be joined at the hip. Although, we should not put our hopes on false potentialities it would be good to see the MSM divorce the MIC, and that honest and varied objections could be then leveled towards our country’s continual scheming to go to war.
Keep up the terrific comments, I look forward to reading your little essays. Joe
Thank you to CN for continuing to provide this important information on the RFK assassination. His death and the subsequent coverup by the actual forces who killed him are part of a set of crimes (political assassinations), that allowed the creation of our current monstrous lawless military empire. Pretending that this is somehow – “looking back,” or “navel gazing” – is of course a disingenuous way to suggest we the public should remain ignorant of these events and thus insure we continue to be ruled by these same psychopathic forces.
The simple fact of a public revisiting of these events, including the evidence and the circumstances, could open the eyes of millions who doubt the official stories, but don’t dare imagine what the alternative to the official story might be and what they might mean. The government trolls have been out in droves on progressive sites all over the web the last few days discouraging any discussion of the assassinations, and/or peddling the propaganda that nothing would have changed had JFK, Malcolm, MLK and RFK not been murdered by our own government. Getting to the truth of these matters is perhaps the only thing that might bring us back from the very real “spiritual death” Dr. King predicted so many decades ago, if our nation continued down the path of violence, racism and empire.
So that makes me a “government troll,” I guess. Ugh, sometimes I hate the internet.
Critics are OK, but Mr. Weglarz opposes the discouragement of challenges to official narratives. Why oppose re-investigation? The 1960s assassinations coincide with the end of US democracy, highly significant and not a coincidence, whatever the cause. Even if we find a very loosely coordinated scheme, say among oligarchs and government agents, we have triumphed. Some of these revelations are remarkable and significant despite the presence of some careless argument, some collections of minor points, etc.
The public is almost completely unaware of the present utter corruption of elections, appointees, the judiciary, and the mass media. This is because we do not wish to believe such awful truths until we have seen the facts ourselves. So the best criticism is to make the accounts clear and significant.
Sam F – Thanks for your comment. Spot on. We have reached a point where much of the discussion at sites like this becomes debate between sincere readers who have taken the time to educate themselves and are continuing to do so, and government trolls who are doing everything they can to take the discussion in non-productive directions and sew enough doubt that those sincere readers unfamiliar with the issue at hand won’t bother to learn more.
When someone’s post look like they are right out of the trolling manual, using what are referred to as: (“The 4 D’s: Deny, Disrupt, Degrade, Deceive”) – I make the logical assumption they are a troll.
https://theintercept.com/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/
So let me ask directly: Do you assume I’m a government troll?
That’s really on a par with accusations, which you may be familiar with, that people who raise the kinds of questions raised by these articles and comments (indeed, CN as a whole and similar sites) are in fact Russian trolls (perhaps useful idiots), whose goal is to sow doubt, distrust, and discord among Americans. I mean, what better way than to make people wonder whether the US government covers up its unspeakable crimes from 2+ generations ago? In fact, the more I think about it, the more logical the assumption that you are, consciously or not, an agent of Putin. Objectively, as Orwell said of pacifists during WWII. I used to shake my head at such accusations coming from the MSM, but maybe they’re right.
“Logical assumption” for others here: the two of us are trolls from opposite sides. Proxy war.
Actually, it may be that we think that’s what we are, but in fact the global war profiteers are behind us both, laughing all the way to the bank.
Or – we’re just two people interested in CN who would like to see it do well and, ideally, reflect our own (divergent, in this case) beliefs about what’s most important to cover and what constitutes effective, convincing journalism on the topic.
DDj – if find it interesting that you so personalized my comments about government trolls that you made the assumption that I must think you are a government troll. My comment wasn’t intended to be a projective psychological test, but I suppose – “if the shoe fits wear it” – as the saying goes? From my perspective I really don’t care if you or anyone else posting here is in fact “a government troll” per se; or if you or someone else posting is simply a person very uniformed on the topic who is nevertheless narcissistic enough to think their uninformed opinion is so terribly important that they must share it over and over even though it is clearly uninformed given their comments – (rather than say taking the time to read a book or two on the topic for example); or thirdly, I don’t really care if someone posts nonsense because they are simply a complete idiot.
By my assessment if someone “posts like a government troll” then they are doing the “work of government trolls” in disrupting and diverting conversations at sites like this, whatever the specific reason for such posts as I just mentioned. I hope that clarifies my thinking for you on the matter.
I have no interest whatsoever in whether you are or are not a government troll, but I would suggest you might consider learning something about a topic before posting comments on said topic. Just saying.
Gary — So narcissism is your diagnosis. Fine. I thought maybe you actually had a concrete comment or commenter in mind when you started spouting concerns about “government trolls,” and I wanted to see if you would put your money where your mouth is, so to speak. And to express my belief that — like trolling itself — accusations of trolling are a way to shut down open discussion. Clearly you disagree, and you apparently think that asking if anyone has a plausible alternative theory is idiotic nonsense that serves only to disrupt and divert. Much more productive, I guess, are vague rumblings about psychopathic political forces.
Anyway, I’ll end with a truly trollish move: a link to another point of view about the RFK assassination in order to “sew doubt” (sic): https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/146031
Not sure what you are saying makes you a “government troll”—but your earlier “show me an alternative” comment already sounded classically troll-like.
Hmmm. Why? When I say I don’t believe in some piece of received wisdom, I expect to be asked: Ok, so what do you think might have happened? I may not know, for all kinds of reasons, and my answer might be: I’m not sure, but it’s clear that the prevailing belief doesn’t hold water. But dismissing that question as “trollish” is silly, a sign of insecurity. I mean, isn’t that question the bottom line? I ask it of people who say “look at all these connections between Trump and Russia!” Ok, I say, put these pieces together in a way that plausibly tells a story of how this collusion took place. I’ve yet to see that done or even attempted intelligently. Many of the aha! items trumpeted by the media actually contradict each other in terms of supporting a collusion narrative. If I get dismissed as a troll or the like for even asking the question, that tells me more about them than about me.
As I said before, a defense attorney doesn’t need to present a convincing alternative scenario, but just establish reasonable doubt about the prosecution’s claim. But I’m a lot more interested in learning what did in fact happen (or at least plausibly could have happened). That means, among other things, seriously grappling with evidence that raises questions about supposed exculpatory evidence (see my linked article, e.g.). Defense attorneys can ignore that, but I’d rather an “investigative journalism” site, one that I like and appreciate, didn’t.
I understand that being asked that question can be frustrating or annoying when you’re just trying to get across that the conventional narrative has problems, or just trying to say let’s reexamine the evidence. But it’s a normal and legitimate question to ask.
Skunk at a garden party? Maybe. But no troll.
OAS, led by the bully USA, is a joke of a “human rights organization”.
Seems like CN is going all in for Kennedy hagiography and alternative assassination theories. Publishing 4 pieces in a row on RFK seems a questionable decision. If nothing else, there are lots of other sites out there covering the same ground.
Meanwhile, we wait for anything on last month’s JIT report on the MH17 shoot down. I think Robert Parry would have wanted CN to stay on that story.
Yeah, that would be nice to see.
The report was apparently just a rehash of earlier reports for the same reasons.
Thanks, Sam F, good to know.
A reader is always “right” when voicing opinion. So if you think four articles is too many you are of course entitled to your view.
For others, however, I’d point out that three of them (including mine) were focused on breakthrough disclosures on the unique occasion of the 50th anniversary of this iconic shooting, and the fourth was an attempt at balance by presenting an advocate of in effect the official story. One of these three treatments, that by James DiEugenio, was a book review of a brand new book that two experienced journalist / authors had each spent a significant part of their last 25 years writing.
Speaking for myself and my co-author, Dr. William Pepper, our contribution was not so much to write about the legend and legacy of RFK, since that is indeed available elsewhere, but instead to focus on here and now situations.
One is that there is a man in prison now, Sirhan Sirhan, who deserves either to be freed or at the minimum to receive the first real evidentiary hearing ever in this iconic case.
If that were not an important enough occasion for an article or three, there is the matter of whether our legal and human rights institutions — and media — are capable of responding to this kind of clear-cut injustice. That’s a matter of concern for millions of litigants, as RFK Jr. noted when he said he was stepping forward in the spirit of his father, formerly the nation’s chief law enforcer.
Thank you for your article. I think we must keep up the pressure until the government and the MSM tell us the truth about our history. Democracy dies without a free press and we have let these lies to continue for too long. I remember well the bravery of Mark Lane and Jim Garrison standing up for disclosure and we honor them when we continue their excellent research. I am often silenced by my own family when I try to explain what happened and why the truth still matters. The truth and a free press will always matter.
Thank you Mr. Kreig, for a very concise and illuminating article. The decision to go to the OAS under Article 18 is especially interesting, revealing that the balance of power in the OAS could in principle eventually stop the US tyranny in Latin America, affecting Venezuela, Ecuador, Brazil and others. That tyranny has been consistently an attack on socialism, hence due to US oligarchy. It would be interesting to hear your views, or those of Mr. Pepper, on the OAS IACHR independence from US power.
I couldn’t help but thinking of how that now that Richard Mellon Scaife & David Rockefeller are gone that maybe Jeff Bezo’s just took over, and he’s is cuddling up to the Kennedy’s for say maybe a visit up to Hyannis Port. Will he the owner of the WaPo be as nice to the relatives of Malcom X & MLK, and what about the other Kennedy family… the JFK’s. What’s going on here? Why the sudden interest?
While on the subject of reopening investigations how about reopening the 911 Attack, and for Pete sake will we ever get to the bottom of the Attack on the USS Liberty? So many lies.
Ah yes,
Thanks Joe for that.
There are many more investigations that need to be reopened. The founder of this website spent a career after its launch conducting such investigations and revealing compelling evidence based on facts not conjecture or theories.
Robert Parry was perhaps the finest journalist of our time because he was committed to uncovering the lies and the official propaganda which masked the truth in the main stream media.
For that service to the truth he was branded a pariah and was shunned by the press. Whet is amazing is that he used his well honed skills to reveal in great detail how the stories he revealed were not based on opinion but were based on evidence and facts.
I can’t see his equal anywhere. His abjuration of the lying news corporations commited his abandonment and exile because of their business model of lying to all of us for profit.
He created this website as an island of truth in a sea of lies and propaganda which has in recent years seen our government become fallen to the corruption enabled by a media establishment which has become the handmaiden and butler to the money powers.
Some often used quotes:
“The money power preys on the nation in times of peace, and conspires against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. It denounces, as public enemies, all who question its methods or throw light upon its crimes.”
Abraham Lincoln
“The fact is that there is a serious danger of this country becoming a pluto-democracy; that is, a sham republic with the real government in the hands of a small clique of enormously wealth men, who speak through their money, and whose influence, even today, radiates to every corner of the United States.”
William McAdoo – President Wilson’s national campaign vice-chairman, wrote in Crowded Years (1974)
“When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time, a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it.”
Frederic Bastiat – (1801-1850) in Economic Sophisms
“The powers of financial capitalism had (a) far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank…sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world.”
Prof. Carroll Quigley in Tragedy and Hope
“In a small Swiss city sits an international organization so obscure and secretive….Control of the institution, the Bank for International Settlements, lies with some of the world’s most powerful and least visible men: the heads of 32 central banks, officials able to shift billions of dollars and alter the course of economies at the stroke of a pen.”
Keith Bradsher of the New York Times, August 5, 1995
“The Federal Reserve Bank of New York is eager to enter into close relationship with the Bank for International Settlements….The conclusion is impossible to escape that the State and Treasury Departments are willing to pool the banking system of Europe and America, setting up a world financial power independent of and above the Government of the United States….The United States under present conditions will be transformed from the most active of manufacturing nations into a consuming and importing nation with a balance of trade against it.”
Rep. Louis McFadden – Chairman of the House Committee on Banking and Currency quoted in the New York Times (June 1930)
“Nothing did more to spur the boom in stocks than the decision made by the New York Federal Reserve bank, in the spring of 1927, to cut the rediscount rate. Benjamin Strong, Governor of the bank, was chief advocate of this unwise measure, which was taken largely at the behest of Montagu Norman of the Bank of England….At the time of the Banks action I warned of its consequences….I felt that sooner or later the market had to break.”
Money baron Bernard Baruch in Baruch: The Public Years (1960)
Great selection of quotes CitizenOne! I am also a big fan of Neil Postman, and even got to see him lecture once at NYU.
Wow, thanks for all of the terrific quotes. Joe
Joe-
I must say that I’m a bit curious about this new development at WaPo. It will be interesting to see how far it goes. It may be that alternative sites like this one are getting to them, and they feel they have to open up a little bit before they lose all credibility. They better watch out though, once the camel of truth gets it’s nose under the tent, the sh*t might really hit the fan.
What we should dwell on, is too how they benefit. If it is Bezos then how does telling the truth about the RFK assassination help the billionaire Amazon giant? I don’t know, but am curious to find out. Next they will be telling us about to who Raoul was to his being Ray’s handler. To who the gunmen was hiding down in the sewer at Dealey Plaza. Maybe they will tell us of what kind of missile it was that hit the Pentagon on September 11th 2001. Who knows, because to who ever holds the narrative they capture the control of the story… another way of saying this, is never let the truth get in the way of a good story. Actually I don’t know what they are up to, if they are up to anything at all. If sudden they are going to start setting the record straight, then we citizens should be all but set for the next 100 years of truth hearing… really?
Skip it’s always a pleasure to hear from you, stay cool. Joe
Speaking of the WaPo, Guyenot neglects to note that Philip Graham’s sister-in-law, Mary Pinchot Meyer, was (1) married to Cord Meyer, a deep CIA operative and (2) had a close relationship with JFK in the months leading up to his death and (3) let Jame Angleton take possession of her diary after her mysterious murder shortly after JFK’s.
Philip Graham was a deeply compromised figure, as was Alsop.
I think the writer Litchfield means that Meyer was the sister-in-law of Newsweek Washington Bureau chief Ben Bradlee, later executive editor of the Washington Post. Newsweek was owned by the Post until recent years. I wrote an in-depth story about the Meyer murder and connections on May 29:
Justice Integrity Project, “Rights Pioneer’s Obit Prompts Disputes Over JFK Murder Half-Truths,” Andrew Kreig, May 29, 2018. https://www.justice-integrity.org/1493-rights-pioneer-s-obit-prompts-disputes-over-jfk-murder-half-truths or http://ow.ly/DMwk30kf2iZ
The Washington Post’s obituary last week of a pioneering African-American lawyer continued the newspaper’s controversial coverage of the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy and the 1964 murder of JFK’s friend and purported lover Mary Pinchot Meyer.
On May 21, the Post published a long and respectful obituary, Dovey Johnson Roundtree, 1914–2018, about an African-American woman by that name who overcame racial bias to carve out impressive careers in the military, law, and ministry in a Washington, DC work environment that was heavily segregated for most of her career.
One of Roundtree’s early highlights was winning a 1965 jury acquittal for Raymond Crump, Jr., an African-American day laborer whom authorities had charged with murdering Meyer on a canal towpath near her home in the capital’s fashionable Georgetown neighborhood.
Obituary writer Harrison Smith reported on Roundtree’s civic commitment and skill in winning the acquittal. The reporter also quoted two commentators — journalist / author Nina Burleigh and attorney Robert Bennett — as opining that Crump was guilty, despite the jury verdict.
Several JFK assassination researchers, including this editor and another Meyer biographer, Peter Janney, sharply challenged via reader comments and letters to the Post its taint of Crump (and by implication Roundtree).
It’s blatantly obvious to those not indoctrinated by news outlets, controlled, in the main, by the very people who were vehemently apposed to the politics of Robert Kenny his brother JFK, his son and not forgetting MLK would be classed as conspiracy theorists or nut cases if they questioned the official line taken by the governments then and today. Control the press and you control the masses! There are countless crimes committed by so called democratic governments that are covered up or not investigated,many have led to wars responsible for the deaths of millions. Problem is,the longer it goes on the more normal it becomes.
Control the press and you control the masses! Well said and so true. Such is the truth also well said that “the longer it goes on the more normal it becomes”.
Neil Postman quoted here:
“When a population becomes distracted by trivia, when cultural life is redefined as a perpetual round of entertainments, when serious public conversation becomes a form of baby-talk, when, in short, a people become an audience, and their public business a vaudeville act, then a nation finds itself at risk; culture-death is a clear possibility.”
How true an assessment of our current situation with our infotainment light, dedicated to distraction and also dedicated to doubling down on misinformation main stream media.
What our fellow citizens are experiencing in our fetid media swamp is the equivalent of drowning in a sea of bullshit.
All this navel gazing & looking into the rear view mirror of the past, over “what could have been” if both had lived & had not been assasinated is pointless? RFK & JFK’s murder’s will never be solved as the assasin’s are long gone but the apparatus that enabled this still exists?? Oliver Stones movie JFK sums it up perfectly that the who or how is irrelevant but what was important was the WHY? Why was both Kennedy’s killed & who stood to profit from both brothers murders?? The list is long & varied over who was responsible?
The PRIMARY object of these renewed interests center more on the fact that there is most likely an innocent person in prison.
Yes, folks wonder what things could have been, nothing wrong with this. Again, though, what could have been for Sirhan’s life? I think it matters here, a lot.
You cannot get to the “why” without first identifying the facts that would come about by investigating the HOW. The HOW leads to the WHO. I’d have to say that the WHY is always difficult to ascertain because, ultimately, one has to get inside the head of the person(s) responsible, and knowing for sure whether one is actually getting correct what those thoughts were is a chase down the rabbit hole. I’d state that the crime was committed because of the availability of POWER, and that better would be to look to understand from whence that power was obtained and to scrutinize whether we ought, as a peoples, accept allowing such power to be available (Ron Paul states that we should abolish the CIA; I tend to agree; for certain, however, there needs to be an extensive dialog on this matter, a dialog that appears only able to be brought to light by independent reporting).
I’m thinking the military apparatus and the industrialists were threatened if a more peaceful stance could be brokered by an administration. Winners, Americans, losers, the bankers and industrialists. And the of course the fact that the CIA held a huge grudge over the Bay if Pigs fiasco. JFK fired Dulles who still pulled the strings along with Angleton et. al. This criminal organization has been in control since the war. (WW II)
KiwiAntz
” what was important was the WHY? ”
Once again the motive was not examined fully.
The long drawn out secret Israeli quest to “get the Bomb”was coming to a head with the Kenedy’s bent on keeping the Middle East free of Nuclear arms.
The (SECRET ) communications between the White House & Ben Gurion became so intense that Ben Gurion resigned to avoid the inspection required by JFK.
Cui Bono ? Israel got it’s “BOMB.”
Thank you Dr. William Pepper and Andrew Kreig.
I’m deeply encouraged by the prospect of shining a new light on this case. I’m totally convinced that there is plenty of new evidence that will lead to the release of Sirhan Sirhan from Prison. Had he been tried appropriately in the first place; he never would have been convicted. I’m especially pleased Dr. Pepper, to see you leading the effort. I read your briefs to the California Appeals Court asking for a new trial for Sirhan and I thought that court was simply dismissive without much comment.
Sirhan should be released, he’s innocent. And a new investigation begun to once and for all establish who killed Bobby.
Bob I agree with you, but would you and I be happy if Sirhan’s innocence leaves us without a killer? I’m not saying we should retain Sirhan, as his being the killer, but I am saying we should at least re-examine Thane Eugene Cesar, at the minimum. If anything an investigation into Sirhan Sirhan’s mental manipulations being done by a U.S. Government agency, I would think Sirhan deserves a ton of compensation. We need to answer all questions, from Cesar’s missing necktie to the Girl in the Polka Dot Dress, and put this case to rest.
If only all the curtains hiding America’s many conspiracies were pulled back, then America could mature to live up to develop a better nature, by how it lived its pass… but don’t get your hopes up. Let’s just wish anyway Bob. Joe
Thanks Joe, as always, I think that in retrial or in decent inquiry that Sirhan would be released because it can be proven that Bobby was killed due to a conspiracy and cover-up. The public should then demand a new and public investigation.
I’d settle for that Bob, but like I said, ‘don’t get your hopes up anytime too soon for justice to prevail in America’. I’m seriously surprised, and caught wondering to what’s behind this WaPo publicity regarding the RFK assassination. Maybe RFK Jr. demands that much press, but Kennedy ramblings over these Kennedy assassinations has been ongoing for many years, so why now? If something is up let’s both hope it’s the real deal, and it doesn’t stop with investigating just the RFK murder, and goes onward to investigate everything worth investigating. Let’s make a list Bob. Joe
Ps we need Oliver Stone
“Bob I agree with you, but would you and I be happy if Sirhan’s innocence leaves us without a killer? ”
I am not Bob, but I think that question is quite immoral. Of course we should be happy if Sirhan is shown to be innocent and is released from prison.
Quite apart from the fact that this is probably the preconditon for having a chance at finding the real killer(s). It is deeply absurd and also illogical to “require” that the “real” killer be found before a probably innocent person can be released from jail. I simply do not understand this logic, which DDj above has also espoused. Justice consists not just of convicting the guilty but also of protecting the innocent. don’t you think? To think otherwise is to think it is A-OK for an innocent man to pay for a guilty man’s sins just so the populace has the satisfaction of “having” a guilty party.
Terrible thought process!! I expect better from Consortium readers!!
You might try reading more carefully. I never said you have to find the killer before you release Sirhan or anyone else from jail. I’ve explicitly said the opposite. What I said was that’s only part of the question, and it’s perfectly reasonable to ask out loud what else might have happened. I’m not Sirhan’s attorney. I’m someone who wonders who killed RFK. If your answer is “I can’t tell yet, but when the case is reopoened, we should learn more,” that’s fine. But dismissing the question itself as immoral or terrible or trollish or whatever — well, I expect(ed) more from CN readers.
Those in power have many tools to coverup and distort the truth. History often becomes the victim of their machinations.
The LAPD and L.A. County District Attorney knew two hours after the shooting of Senator Kennedy that he was shot by a second gunman and they had conclusive evidence that Sirhan could not — and did not — do it.
The official record shows that the prosecution at Sirhan’s trial never had one witness — and had no physical nor ballistic evidence — to prove Sirhan shot Bob Kennedy. Evidence locked up for 20 years shows that the LAPD destroyed physical evidence and hid ballistic evidence exonerating Sirhan — and covered up conclusive evidence that a second gunman fatally wounded Robert Kennedy.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article44184.htm#sthash.SXA4XfsJ.dpuf
As for motive, Robert Kenedy said (I paraphrase) “only the powers of the presidency will reveal the truth about my brother’s murder.” Robert’s potential landslide victory in November 1968, had he remained alive, was a scary prospect for some people, particularly those who resented JFK’s resolve to keep the Middle East nuclear weapons free by rolling back the Zionist state’s nuclear weapons program that had started in the Negev in 1956.
Can anyone imagine any US Politician wanting to investigate ?
/
Glad to see RFK Jr. calling for a new investigation. I’d like to see Caroline Kennedy do the same regarding the deaths of her father and brother. I know it must be excruciatingly painful though.