© Wikimedia Commons
Presstitute Media, such as the UK
Telegraph, spend a lot of energy debunking exposes of government conspiracies. For example, the thousands of highrise architects, structural engineers, physicists, nano-chemists, demolition experts, first responders, military and civilian pilots, and former government officials who have provided vast evidence that the official story of 9/11 is a made-up fairy tale at odds with all evidence and the laws of physics are dismissed by presstitutes as "conspiracy theorists."
Similarly, those, such as James W. Douglass, who have proven beyond all doubt that President John F. Kennedy was not assassinated by Oswald but by his own paranoid anti-communist military-security complex, are dismissed as conspiracy theorists.
The 9/11 Commission Report and the Warren Commission Report were cover-ups. VP Dick Cheney and the neoconservatives he sponsored needed a "new Pearl Harbor" in order to begin their military assaults on the Middle Eastern countries that had independent foreign policies instead of being US/Israeli vassals. 9/11 was their orchestrated "new Pearl Harbor," and this fact had to be covered up when 9/11 families persisted in their demands for an investigation and could not be bought off for large sums of money.
Similarly, the Warren Commission had no choice but to cover up that a popular American president, John F. Kennedy, had been murdered by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the CIA, and the Secret Service, because he was believed by paranoid anti-communists to be "soft on communism" and thereby a threat to the security of the United States. The cold war was on, and the Warren Commission could not hold those responsible accountable without destroying the public's confidence in the American military and security services.
Nevertheless everyone aware of the forged case against Oswald knew what had happened. One of these people was Attorney General Robert Kennedy, JFK's brother.
Bobby Kennedy understood the situation. He knew that as a member of a cover-up administration he could do nothing about it. However, he knew that if he won the presidency, he could hold accountable those security elements responsible. His brother had told him that after his reelection he was going to "break the CIA into a thousand pieces." When the Vietnam war destroyed President Lyndon Johnson, Bobby Kennedy emerged as the next president of the US.
Bobby Kennedy was assassinated the evening that he won the California Democratic primary. Sirhan Sirhan was blamed. He was standing in front of Kennedy. He had an eight shot low caliber pistol, which he fired. He did hit Paul Shrade, who was standing next to Kennedy. But he did not hit Kennedy. Kennedy, according to the medical evidence and eye witnesses was killed from shots to his back and to the back of his head.
© Wikimedia Commons
This was confirmed to me years ago by a distinguished journalist and documentary film maker who was standing just behind Robert Kennedy when he was shot. He told me that he felt the bullet that hit Kennedy go by his ear and saw its impact. He wrote a full report for the FBI and despite his credentials was never contacted by the investigation.
Now, last Wednesday, 48 years later, Paul Shrade has presented ironclad evidence at the parole hearing of the now 71 year old Sirhan Sirhan that Robert Kennedy was shot by someone else from the rear, not from the front where Sirhan Sirhan was standing.
You can read Paul Shrade's
statement here.Of course, the presstitute media will say that Paul Shrade, who was himself shot when Kennedy was assassinated, is a "conspiracy theorist." Remember: a conspiracy theorist is anyone who on the basis of hard evidence challenges a government that blames its crime on an innocent third party.
At the time of Robert Kennedy's assassination, the CIA was conducing mind control experiments. Experts think that Sirhan Sirhan was one of those under the CIA's control. This would explain why Sirhan Sirhan has no memory of the event.
President John F. Kennedy had experienced in the Joint Chiefs of Staff under Chairman Lyman Lemnitzer a high level of insubordination. Lemnitzer showed in White House meetings contempt for the president. When Lemnitzer brought Kennedy the Northwoods Project to shoot down American citizens in the streets of America and to blow American airliners out of the sky in order to place the blame on Castro so that the US could invade and achieve "regime change," a popular term of the George W. Bush regime, in Cuba, President Kennedy removed Lemnitzer as chairman and sent him to Europe as head of NATO.
Kennedy did not know about Operation
Gladio, an assassination program in Europe run by NATO and the CIA. Communists were blamed for Operation
Gladio's bombings of civilians in train stations in order to erode communist political influence, especially in Italy. Thus, Kennedy's way of getting rid of Lemnitzer put Lemnitzer in charge of this program and gave Lemnitzer a way to get rid of John Kennedy.
Anyone who thinks that democratic governments would not kill their own citizens is uninformed beyond belief. If, dear reader, you are one of these gullible people, please go to the Internet and become familiar, for example, with Operation Northwoods and Operation Gladio.
Reader Comments
How did Kennedy defeat Nixon in the '60 US presidential election? Does anybody remember? Few do, actually, it being over 50 years ago. It was one of the closest elections in American history up to that point, with Kennedy polling 49.7% and Nixon 49.5%, and Kennedy's final vote tally edging Nixon by a mere 100,000 votes (despite Nixon carrying more states than Kennedy.) The final Electoral College tally was 303-219, BUT it was a hair-breadth victory for Kennedy that really came down to the wire (much like the 2000 election.)
Thus the 1960 election ultimately came down to a few hyper-critical states, including Texas and Illinois. If Kennedy lost Illinois and Texas, he lost the election, period.
Now, Texas, being LBJ's home state, was basically in the bag, with the Texas oilmen behind LBJ 100% (and expecting to be remembered as being critical to any LBJ/Kennedy victory, of course; see below.)
Problem was, Illinois (then, as now, apparently) was a VERY corrupt state, and the mob really had the unions in its pocket. Same for numerous other states as well. The unions (many mostly or totally mob controlled at the time) were absolutely critical to insuring a Kennedy victory --or loss.
So, rumor has it, that someone from the Kennedy camp cut a deal with the mob: you make sure we carry crucial states where the union vote will be critical, and we will 'live and let live', so to speak. No Kefauver Committees, no going after mafioso. Just an 'ignore and deflect' program that protected everyone's key interests. And this program was one that had been in place at the FBI for decades, with FBI head honcho J. Edgar Hoover denying the existence of 'organized crime' during the entirety of his career leading the Bureau (which said 'mafia myopia' was allegedly spurred by some very 'delicate' footage of Hoover enjoying the pleasures of various young men, not unlike how some have alleged many of the elites in the UK/EU and elsewhere are all likewise controlled to this day. That, and bribery.)
Okay, so a deal was allegedly struck, and Illinois and Texas (and others) went to Kennedy, and Kennedy won a VERY questionable victory.
But that left Kennedy's over-active nut-sack in the sweaty palms of the mob, which Kennedy did not like or want. So many have theorized that JFK dreamed up an ill-fated plan: immediately betray the mob and have his brother, Bobby, lead the Justice Department in a frenzied attack on the entire US mafia structure, as if to show, "See! See! How could anyone say I was 'controlled' by the mob? Look at how aggressively and relentlessly I attack them. I hate the mob. I will destroy the mob."
Betraying the mob is a stupid move. A deathly stupid move, to be exact.
Thus, the mob was intricately linked with the assassination of Kennedy (as likely were the oil magnates of Texas and elsewhere, who also hated Kennedy for his 'betrayal' via JFK's plan to eliminate the lucrative 'oil depletion allowance', along with the anti-Kennedy animus of their oily henchman, LBJ, who likewise despised Kennedy and desperately wanted to be POTUS.)
In short, a LOT of folks wanted Kennedy dead. Same for his kid brother. It was not just the CIA/MIC and Secret Service. Not by a long shot.
Now, we all know that the CIA was originally the OSS, and that the OSS got into bed with the mob via the Allies' plan to exploit Italy's 'soft underbelly' in WW2 (using Churchill's quaint description.) The CIA was literally born out of the love-fest between the mafia leaders of Italy (the 'Black Hand') and the OSS, ostensibly to win WW2, but not coincidentally to also allow the nascent CIA to get involved in highly profitable mafia side jobs world-wide to fund black ops projects and keep their noses firmly in the dirt, where much, if not most, of the international political action really rests and flourishes ("Golden Triangle", anyone?)
Politicians are simply mobsters with suits and ties. Basically all are dirty in one fashion or another, and the various crime syndicates around the world have and keep all that political dirt at hand for whenever needed. The CIA is an integral part of all this, as is shown today by the EU leaders and media all being 'slaves' of the West, no matter how much it hurts the various EU member's own interests. Blackmail and bribery work, every time. (Or, assassination.)
Thus, leaving out the mob in Kennedy's assassination is somewhat inexcusable, to my mind.
Oh, sure, the CIA/MIC/Secret Service all had horribly bloody hands and fingers in the assassination, but the mob was allegedly critical in bringing the shooters together, as was the mob-myopic FBI under Hoover, as Hoover personally controlled exactly what pablum bullsh*t was spoon fed to the Warren Commission political nabobs who knew exactly what their jobs were, and carried the bloody water and wood willingly.
And with that last comment, I'll leave it your imagination who was also likely involved in Kennedy's assassination, as it was no secret that Kennedy also took a dim view of a certain middle eastern country's clandestine nuclear program, and was also about to try and put a stop to it (and further, that many organized crime leaders were of this 'persuasion', as well, but that's another can of worms for another day...... )
What I don't agree with is your suggestion that a lot of these people/entities conspired together to actually perform the act. Sharing the knowledge and/or plans and co-ordinating the effort outside of a single tightly-knit group would have been foolish to the extreme in terms of the opsec required to pull it off without getting caught/blamed.
While many were probably looking into how to get rid of Kennedy, even to the extent of formulating detailed strategies/plans, I expect that it was only one of them that actually did the deed without the knowledge of and assistance from any of the others.
familiar with U.S. politics at the time, is it true that the Kennedys' family money came from illegal activities ?
I would appreciate an answer to my question.
It is said that Joseph P. Kennedy was involved in many stock/financial manipulation schemes, and it is certain that he was also involved in the alcohol business DURING Prohibition, although, since it was "medicinal" alcohol, it was legal. Of course, this provided an excellent cover for also engaging in the illegal alcohol business, but I don't believe that actual proof that he did so has been made public.
He also made arrangements to corner a large share of the alcohol market in the US (all done while Prohibition was still in effect) with the expectation that Prohibition would eventually be repealed - also not strictly illegal, but perhaps ethically questionable.
You'd have to ask the Kennedy family about that. I would have no idea if any of that were true or not. sottreader's comment provides something of a response, but again, I would have no idea.
As to the above comment I made, it is just my opinion, maybe the mob had nothing to do with his assassination. But from what I have read, the CIA and the mafia are in bed enough to have shared many common interests (Cuba/Bay of Pigs being a big one) at the time, so to exclude one or the other seems bizarre.
As to sottreader's comment on my OP, I merely suggested that a lot of people "wanted Kennedy dead". He seemed to specialize in that, sadly. Pissing off the PTB happens when you want to shake up a corrupt world. And even today, a lot of people want Obomber dead. Or Hillary. Or Trump. Hate directed towards one's perceived enemies is pretty common in this world. And some psychos are even willing to act on it. Too many, by my reckoning.
But think Operation Gladio and how many people were involved in that. How many ratted out? Few, if any, knowing the consequences. And many of these type are of a like mind, very focused and dedicated to the cause, and take their secrets with them to the grave. You and I don't think like they do, and thank Dog!
Bear in mind that the Manhattan Project was a pretty well-kept secret, too. So was 9/11. How many of those folks blabbed?
I agree that on one level, it is hard for me, too, to believe such a large conspiracy would unfold and remain secret to this day. But there have been a number of books about the various JFK witnesses disappearing or dying mysteriously just before testifying or after opening their mouths, and SOTT regularly has articles about false flag killings involving lots of people (recent stories about MLK's assassination spring to mind.) Again, these folks don't think like us.
I just wish there were far less of those types of people in this world, sad to say.
Aint democracy great?