PDA

View Full Version : Did the CIA kill Bobby Kennedy?


Ahknaton
11-20-2006, 11:45 PM
Did the CIA kill Bobby Kennedy?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,1952393,00.html

In 1968, Robert Kennedy seemed likely to follow his brother, John, into the White House. Then, on June 6, he was assassinated - apparently by a lone gunman. But Shane O'Sullivan says he has evidence implicating three CIA agents in the murder

Monday November 20, 2006
The Guardian

At first, it seems an open-and-shut case. On June 5 1968, Robert Kennedy wins the California Democratic primary and is set to challenge Richard Nixon for the White House. After midnight, he finishes his victory speech at the Ambassador hotel in Los Angeles and is shaking hands with kitchen staff in a crowded pantry when 24-year-old Palestinian Sirhan Sirhan steps down from a tray-stacker with a "sick, villainous smile" on his face and starts firing at Kennedy with an eight-shot revolver.

Article continues
As Kennedy lies dying on the pantry floor, Sirhan is arrested as the lone assassin. He carries the motive in his shirt-pocket (a clipping about Kennedy's plans to sell bombers to Israel) and notebooks at his house seem to incriminate him. But the autopsy report suggests Sirhan could not have fired the shots that killed Kennedy. Witnesses place Sirhan's gun several feet in front of Kennedy, but the fatal bullet is fired from one inch behind. And more bullet-holes are found in the pantry than Sirhan's gun can hold, suggesting a second gunman is involved. Sirhan's notebooks show a bizarre series of "automatic writing" - "RFK must die RFK must be killed - Robert F Kennedy must be assassinated before 5 June 68" - and even under hypnosis, he has never been able to remember shooting Kennedy. He recalls "being led into a dark place by a girl who wanted coffee", then being choked by an angry mob. Defence psychiatrists conclude he was in a trance at the time of the shooting and leading psychiatrists suggest he may have be a hypnotically programmed assassin.

Three years ago, I started writing a screenplay about the assassination of Robert Kennedy, caught up in a strange tale of second guns and "Manchurian candidates" (as the movie termed brainwashed assassins). As I researched the case, I uncovered new video and photographic evidence suggesting that three senior CIA operatives were behind the killing. I did not buy the official ending that Sirhan acted alone, and started dipping into the nether-world of "assassination research", crossing paths with David Sanchez Morales, a fearsome Yaqui Indian.

Morales was a legendary figure in CIA covert operations. According to close associate Tom Clines, if you saw Morales walking down the street in a Latin American capital, you knew a coup was about to happen. When the subject of the Kennedys came up in a late-night session with friends in 1973, Morales launched into a tirade that finished: "I was in Dallas when we got the son of a bitch and I was in Los Angeles when we got the little bastard." From this line grew my odyssey into the spook world of the 60s and the secrets behind the death of Bobby Kennedy.

Working from a Cuban photograph of Morales from 1959, I viewed news coverage of the assassination to see if I could spot the man the Cubans called El Gordo - The Fat One. Fifteen minutes in, there he was, standing at the back of the ballroom, in the moments between the end of Kennedy's speech and the shooting. Thirty minutes later, there he was again, casually floating around the darkened ballroom while an associate with a pencil moustache took notes.

The source of early research on Morales was Bradley Ayers, a retired US army captain who had been seconded to JM-Wave, the CIA's Miami base in 1963, to work closely with chief of operations Morales on training Cuban exiles to run sabotage raids on Castro. I tracked Ayers down to a small town in Wisconsin and emailed him stills of Morales and another guy I found suspicious - a man who is pictured entering the ballroom from the direction of the pantry moments after the shooting, clutching a small container to his body, and being waved towards an exit by a Latin associate.

Ayers' response was instant. He was 95% sure that the first figure was Morales and equally sure that the other man was Gordon Campbell, who worked alongside Morales at JM-Wave in 1963 and was Ayers' case officer shortly before the JFK assassination.

I put my script aside and flew to the US to interview key witnesses for a documentary on the unfolding story. In person, Ayers positively identified Morales and Campbell and introduced me to David Rabern, a freelance operative who was part of the Bay of Pigs invasion force in 1961 and was at the Ambassador hotel that night. He did not know Morales and Campbell by name but saw them talking to each other out in the lobby before the shooting and assumed they were Kennedy's security people. He also saw Campbell around police stations three or four times in the year before Robert Kennedy was shot.

This was odd. The CIA had no domestic jurisdiction and Morales was stationed in Laos in 1968. With no secret service protection for presidential candidates in those days, Kennedy was guarded by unarmed Olympic decathlete champion Rafer Johnson and football tackler Rosey Grier - no match for an expert assassination team.

Trawling through microfilm of the police investigation, I found further photographs of Campbell with a third figure, standing centre-stage in the Ambassador hotel hours before the shooting. He looked Greek, and I suspected he might be George Joannides, chief of psychological warfare operations at JM-Wave. Joannides was called out of retirement in 1978 to act as the CIA liaison to the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) investigating the death of John F Kennedy.

Ed Lopez, now a respected lawyer at Cornell University, came into close contact with Joann-des when he was a young law student working for the committee. We visit him and show him the photograph and he is 99% sure it is Joannides. When I tell him where it was taken, he is not surprised: "If these guys decided you were bad, they acted on it.

We move to Washington to meet Wayne Smith, a state department official for 25 years who knew Morales well at the US embassy in Havana in 1959-60. When we show him the video in the ballroom, his response is instant: "That's him, that's Morales." He remembers Morales at a cocktail party in Buenos Aires in 1975, saying Kennedy got what was coming to him. Is there a benign explanation for his presence? For Kennedy's security, maybe? Smith laughs. Morales is the last person you would want to protect Bobby Kennedy, he says. He hated the Kennedys, blaming their lack of air support for the failed Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961.

We meet Clines in a hotel room near CIA headquarters. He does not want to go on camera and brings a friend, which is a little unnerving. Clines remembers "Dave" fondly. The guy in the video looks like Morales but it is not him, he says: "This guy is fatter and Morales walked with more of a slouch and his tie down." To me, the guy in the video does walk with a slouch and his tie is down.

Clines says he knew Joannides and Campbell and it is not them either, but he fondly remembers Ayers bringing snakes into JM-Wave to scare the secretaries and seems disturbed at Smith's identification of Morales. He does not discourage our investigation and suggests others who might be able to help. A seasoned journalist cautions that he would expect Clines "to blow smoke", and yet it seems his honest opinion.

As we leave Los Angeles, I tell the immigration officer that I am doing a story on Bobby Kennedy. She has seen the advertisements for the new Emilio Estevez movie about the assassination, Bobby. "Who do you think did it? I think it was the Mob," she says before I can answer.

"I definitely think it was more than one man," I say, discreetly.

Morales died of a heart attack in 1978, weeks before he was to be called before the HSCA. Joannides died in 1990. Campbell may still be out there somewhere, in his early 80s. Given the positive identifications we have gathered on these three, the CIA and the Los Angeles Police Department need to explain what they were doing there. Lopez believes the CIA should call in and interview everybody who knew them, disclose whether they were on a CIA operation and, if not, why they were there that night.

Today would have been Robert Kennedy's 81st birthday. The world is crying out for a compassionate leader like him. If dark forces were behind his elimination, it needs to be investigated

· Shane O'Sullivan's investigation will be shown tonight on Newsnight, BBC2, 10.30pm.

Sulla the Dictator
11-20-2006, 11:55 PM
No. The Kennedy's are self obsessed degenerates.

Kodos
11-21-2006, 12:10 AM
Good for the CIA if they shot the bastard.

Felix the Cat
11-21-2006, 02:52 AM
If Kennedy had won 1968, what would he have done?

WFHermans
11-21-2006, 02:55 AM
If Kennedy had won 1968, what would have done?
Exactly. That's the number one question to find out who profited from RFK's death, and who therefore ordered it.

Starr
11-21-2006, 03:00 AM
I don't know who I think did it, but I do know Sirhan Sirhan was a strange character. I remember seeing an interview with him once where he said he did not remember doing it, but he believes he did it because that is what he was told.:confused: There was definitely more than one shooter.

Quite obviously whoever took out John most likely also took out Bobby Kennedy.

Globus
11-21-2006, 03:16 AM
Exactly. That's the number one question to find out who profited from RFK's death, and who therefore ordered it.

Hey Herman, your sig quote about the Talmud is a lie.

Commander
11-21-2006, 03:33 AM
Robert Kennedy was not assassinated on the 6th of June, he died that day, He was shot on, I think the 4th, around 11P.M. EDT. I remember the kids at school were talking about it, the next morning. I had gone to bed much earlier, I knew nothing about it till that point.

Someone didn't want him in the Whitehouse that's for sure. It was widely believed he would have pulled the troops out of Vietnam rather fast, likely a year or so at the most.

My personal belief is the Jews killed him because they did not want him going after his brother's killers, also Jews. JFK's death was over his refusal to let Israel get the atom bomb. Mordecai Vanunu has stated similar views on why JFK was killed I believe.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/04/21/1538214

http://www.peaceheroes.com/MordecaiVanunu/mvanunu.htm

Starr
11-21-2006, 03:45 AM
My personal belief is the Jews killed him because they did not want him going after his brother's killers,

Yes, I have heard a lot of people talk about how whoever killed John might have feared Bobby, as president coming after them, or at least revealing who he suspected or knew did it.

Trojan
11-21-2006, 05:30 AM
Exactly. That's the number one question to find out who profited from RFK's death, and who therefore ordered it.

Holy shit, Nixon killed RFK! :viking:

Starr
11-21-2006, 06:33 AM
Holy shit, Nixon killed RFK! :viking:


I know you are joking here, but on a more serious note, if we are talking political figures I have always found LBJ to be a likely candidate for at least being involved in the assassination of John, so possible Robert as well.

I recall Jack Ruby saying something to that effect.......right before he died.

Sudaev
11-21-2006, 07:44 AM
The gun store where Sirhan bought that revolver is right here in town; I was in it just the other day.

Anyway that initial post was extremely interesting although I take everything with a grain of salt anymore. The prevailing opinion among conspiracy types was that the mob stiffed in a shill in the private security company at the hotel, and he killed Kennedy from behind. I'm not sure how exactly it ties in with those CIA people though.

Vasily Zaitsev
11-21-2006, 08:51 AM
Jews did RFK?

Trojan
11-21-2006, 02:24 PM
I know you are joking here, but on a more serious note, if we are talking political figures I have always found LBJ to be a likely candidate for at least being involved in the assassination of John, so possible Robert as well.

I recall Jack Ruby saying something to that effect.......right before he died.

LBJ dropped out of the presidental election for 1968, what would be his motive to kill Robert Kennedy after LBJ had ended his political life?

Geist
11-21-2006, 02:40 PM
Keep in mind the guy is merely suggesting that three agents were unaccounted for, and all were known for hating the Kennedies, and also working on the anti-Castro unit of the CIA [so pissed about the Bay of Pigs.]

There is definately questions raised in all this, but it is not, as yet, evidence.

Felix the Cat
11-21-2006, 06:45 PM
Kennedy seems to have been a fervent Zionist.

Seems strange that The Jews would kill him in order to put Nixon (!) in the White House

Stick to the Facts
11-21-2006, 06:50 PM
Let me get this straight. A lot of you guys are trying to piece together a conspiracy to kill Bobby Kennedy out of rumors and marginal 'evidence', but you don't believe the Holocaust happened as claimed?

You're going to have to come up with a better reason than "lack of evidence" for denying/revising the Holocaust from now on. It is clear you believe what you want to, and then cling to ANY piece of 'evidence' that supports that belief.

Geist
11-21-2006, 06:56 PM
Let me get this straight. A lot of you guys are trying to piece together a conspiracy to kill Bobby Kennedy out of rumors and marginal 'evidence', but you don't believe the Holocaust happened as claimed?


This is not a conspiracy. Read the thread. It is about three CIA agents unaccounted for and nothing more. This was on BBC Newsnight last night, and the article is from the Guardian so its hardly taken from thin air.

Commander
11-21-2006, 07:04 PM
The "Holocaust" is a very large, complicated story. RFK's murder is pretty cut & dry, it was on live t.v. I personally did not see it live, but my friend at school did, he was telling me about it the next day.

Robert Kennedy was a son-of-a-bitch, (in a manner of speaking), he went after the Mafia, & Jimmy Hoffa like mad. He did not care who he pissed off. Check it out, you will see. Somebody for sure killed him, it has been speculated many times over the years, from many different sources, his death was more than just the work of 1 man.

Whoever was responsible for his brother's death, they knew RFK's reputation, they knew he would start trouble, he would not back down. Politicians back then, some had guts, not like the useless pieces of shit we have now.

President Kennedy was a good man, he did what he thought was right, he was not a servant of foreign lobby groups. This, I believe, ultimately cost him his life.

Stick to the Facts
11-21-2006, 07:17 PM
This is not a conspiracy. Read the thread. It is about three CIA agents unaccounted for and nothing more. This was on BBC Newsnight last night, and the article is from the Guardian so its hardly taken from thin air.

Thread title: Did the CIA kill Bobby Kennedy?

A conspiracy can be two people.

Felix the Cat
11-21-2006, 07:23 PM
The point has already been made that the Kennedys made many enemies, both domestic and foreign. This is rich ground for speculation and folks will never tire of raking over these questions.

I think the "official" explanations are the likliest ones: John was shot by a Communist sore about Cuba, and Robert by a Palestinian sore about Israel

Geist
11-21-2006, 07:24 PM
Thread title: Did the CIA kill Bobby Kennedy?

A conspiracy can be two people.

Its the article title from the Guardian, not forum opinion.

WFHermans
11-21-2006, 07:26 PM
Witnesses place Sirhan's gun several feet in front of Kennedy, but the fatal bullet is fired from one inch behind. And more bullet-holes are found in the pantry than Sirhan's gun can hold
If these facts are true, Sirhanx2 can't have been the lone assassin.

Stick to the Facts
11-21-2006, 07:38 PM
Its the article title from the Guardian, not forum opinion.

If the CIA had been involved in assassinating Bobby Kennedy it would by definition have been a conspiracy.

The point is that some will believe something with little or no evidence yet deny or otherwise revise the Holocaust, on the grounds of insufficient evidence, when there are miles of documents and eye witness testimony by the Nazis themselves.

I only sought to draw attention to the gross lack of consistency.

Burrhus
11-21-2006, 08:16 PM
Just stirring the pot a bit.

Kennedy began his career at the end of 1951 working for the Internal Security Division of the Department of Justice, which investigates Soviet agents.[1] In December 1952, at the behest of his father, he was appointed by Republican Senator Joe McCarthy as assistant counsel of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.[2] He resigned in July 1952 but "retained a fondness for McCarthy." [3] After a spell as an assistant to his father on the Hoover commission, Kennedy rejoined the Senate committee staff as chief counsel for the Democratic minority in February 1954. [4] When the Democrats gained the majority in January 1955, he became chief counsel. Kennedy was a background figure in the televised McCarthy Hearings of 1954 into the conduct of McCarthy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_F._Kennedy

Sudaev
11-21-2006, 08:31 PM
The point is that some will believe something with little or no evidence yet deny or otherwise revise the Holocaust, on the grounds of insufficient evidence

I for one don't "deny the holocaust" but the fact is that the RFK assassination conspiracy seems a lot more obvious than even the JFK killing, if you look into it.

Here is a very good link to a summation of what happened that night, and the ensuing Mickey-Mouse investigation replete with what appears to be a cover up. One of the weirdest things is the woman in the polka-dot dress. LAPD went out of their way to agressively discount anything that didn't point directly to Sirhan.

http://scribblguy.50megs.com/illusion2.htm

You tell me why RFK had a contact-shot to the back of the head, complete with powder residue ("tattooing"), indicating the gun was only a couple of inches from his head. Sirhan was always in fron of RFK and never got that close.

Burrhus
11-21-2006, 08:40 PM
I know you are joking here, but on a more serious note, if we are talking political figures I have always found LBJ to be a likely candidate for at least being involved in the assassination of John, so possible Robert as well.

I recall Jack Ruby saying something to that effect.......right before he died.

The day that JFK was killed people asked who I thought was behind it and I said LBJ. I don't think that he was the prime mover but he knew it was coming and was involved. If that is true and RFK knew it, then it would be logical for LBJ to not want Bobby in the Whitehouse.

As to Israeli involvement in either the JFK or RFK murders, LBJ was a big Israel supporter. He blew off the USS Liberty attack, supplied Israel with US arms and helped maintain the propaganda lie at the time which covered up the fact that it was Israel that started the 1967 war.

To the jews and philo-semites: This thread is about RFK. If you want to debate the 1967 war, start a new thread.

Geist
11-21-2006, 08:48 PM
If the CIA had been involved in assassinating Bobby Kennedy it would by definition have been a conspiracy.

The point is that some will believe something with little or no evidence yet deny or otherwise revise the Holocaust, on the grounds of insufficient evidence, when there are miles of documents and eye witness testimony by the Nazis themselves.

I only sought to draw attention to the gross lack of consistency.

The point is the thread title refers to the Guardian article, and there is no correlation between it and the Holocaust.

Starr
11-21-2006, 09:03 PM
I always found this to be interesting, to say the least:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTli19k_eYU

Are these people in very high positions, Jack?
yes.

Stick to the Facts
11-21-2006, 09:19 PM
The point is the thread title refers to the Guardian article, and there is no correlation between it and the Holocaust.

I am drawing a comparison between a belief in a thing for which there is little or no evidence, and disbelief in a thing for which there is enormous evidence.

If the CIA was involved in Bobby Kennedy's assasination it would be a conspiracy. Some of you believe it was involved. Therefore some of you believe it was a conspiracy.

Many of those same people here are holocaust deniers/revisionists. They refuse to believe something for lack of evidence when that evidence is FAR FAR greater than that which they use to support their believe in the above conspiracy.

Furthermore, none of the deniers/revisionists ever bothers to produce any evidence of a conspiracy to cover up the holcaust. Why can't they produce evidence of the coverup ITSELF?

I am merely drawing attention to the gross inconsistencies here.

Vasily Zaitsev
11-22-2006, 02:50 AM
I don't really care. It's just funny to say "Jews did RFK" in the same way that the whole "Jews did 9/11" business is a laugh riot. Enjoyable in its absurdity.

For the record, I'm not a 9/11 conspiracy theorist.

Kodos
11-22-2006, 02:55 AM
Yes, I have heard a lot of people talk about how whoever killed John might have feared Bobby, as president coming after them, or at least revealing who he suspected or knew did it.

JFK was shot by Oswald probably because Oswald was a little disturbed... maybe some of LBJ's friends helped him out a little but it was no grand conspiracy.

Kodos
11-22-2006, 03:04 AM
I don't really care. It's just funny to say "Jews did RFK" in the same way that the whole "Jews did 9/11" business is a laugh riot. Enjoyable in its absurdity.

For the record, I'm not a 9/11 conspiracy theorist.

Kyle did 9/11.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFhDIm48a_4

Felix the Cat
11-22-2006, 06:31 AM
The death of JFK was used to justify US intervention in Indochina, therefore opponents of that war were eager to prove communists had nothing to do with his assassination

Same again now, with folks opposed to current US foreign policy wanting to prove Muslims had nothing to do with 911

Burrhus
11-22-2006, 02:53 PM
I don't really care. It's just funny to say "Jews did RFK" in the same way that the whole "Jews did 9/11" business is a laugh riot. Enjoyable in its absurdity.

For the record, I'm not a 9/11 conspiracy theorist.

So, J.M., you don't believe that Osama Bin Laden and his secret Al Qaida organization, unknown to most Americans prior to 911, engaged in a conspiracy to plan, train and pay 19 moslems to execute the attacks on American soil known as 911?

I agree.

Trojan
11-22-2006, 09:08 PM
So, J.M., you don't believe that Osama Bin Laden and his secret Al Qaida organization, unknown to most Americans prior to 911, engaged in a conspiracy to plan, train and pay 19 moslems to execute the attacks on American soil known as 911?

I agree.

Osama and AlQaida were far from unknown.

As we watched the devestation at work that day, Osama was already part of the discussion, and was not because of what we heard on the air.

Burrhus
11-23-2006, 05:23 PM
Originally Posted by Burrhus
So, J.M., you don't believe that Osama Bin Laden and his secret Al Qaida organization, unknown to most Americans prior to 911, engaged in a conspiracy to plan, train and pay 19 moslems to execute the attacks on American soil known as 911?

I agree.

Trojan: Osama and AlQaida were far from unknown.

So say you. I suspect that a poll of Americans would disagree. I do.

Trojan: As we watched the devestation at work that day, Osama was already part of the discussion, and was not because of what we heard on the air.

And on Sept 10,2001? Not so much, huh?

Jake Featherston
11-27-2006, 07:46 AM
Many of those same people here are holocaust deniers/revisionists. They refuse to believe something for lack of evidence when that evidence is FAR FAR greater than that which they use to support their believe in the above conspiracy.

Furthermore, none of the deniers/revisionists ever bothers to produce any evidence of a conspiracy to cover up the holcaust. Why can't they produce evidence of the coverup ITSELF?

I am merely drawing attention to the gross inconsistencies here.

Yeah, well, we're not talking about that now in this thread, you faggotty little troll.

Jake Featherston
11-27-2006, 07:52 AM
The death of JFK was used to justify US intervention in Indochina, therefore opponents of that war were eager to prove communists had nothing to do with his assassination

That something of a media-sponsored myth; its not at all clear Kennedy wouldn't have taken us full-bore into Vietnam, the same way Johnson did. Liberals enjoy believing otherwise, and their views permeate our society via the media, academia, etc., but that doesn't mean there's any bona fide historical basis for that belief. Kennedy was a lot more hawkish on Vietnam than is generally acknowledged.

Jake Featherston
11-27-2006, 07:57 AM
So say you. I suspect that a poll of Americans would disagree. I do.

Informed people knew who Osama bin-Laden was since at least the Khobar Towers bombing of 1995 or '96. I knew who he was since 1993. It doesn't prove anything to demonstrate that ignorant people didn't know about him; that's the defining characteristic of ignorance, after all. Most Americans couldn't list the last five Vice-Presidents of the United States to save their lives. The fact they didn't know who Osama bin-Laden is means nothing. Informed citizens did know.

koch curve
11-27-2006, 08:01 AM
http://crimemagazine.com/05/robertkennedy,0508-5.htm

koch curve
11-27-2006, 08:06 AM
So say you. I suspect that a poll of Americans would disagree. I do.

because being known by the american public is of course a measure of their terroristic prowess :rolleyes:

although i guess that may be true in reverse, being that i doubt anyone even here could say who hambali is, yet at one point he was one of the most dangerous men in the world

And on Sept 10,2001? Not so much, huh?

what, you expect al qaeda to be crashing planes into the wtc 24/7?