Sirhan Sirhan the accused and legally convicted killer of Robert Kennedy filed legal documents in Federal Court in Los Angeles this week. His attorney, William F. Pepper, alleges that his client had been subjected to hypnosis and mind control and had been “handled” at the murder scene by an unidentified woman who helped stage the assassination.
Pepper’s filing include significant references to witness statements and forensic reports that were systematically suppressed during the investigation.
Pepper alleges that Sirhan Sirhan is innocent and that Kennedy was murdered as part of a conspiracy in which his client was involved as a “patsy” though use of hypnosis and other means.
Harvard University professor Daniel Brown, a noted expert in hypnosis and trauma memory loss, who interviewed Sirhan for over 60 hours, is believed to have “broken” Sirhan’s “programming.”
This is what was learned;
Sirhan was taken to the Ambassador Hotel by handlers. At some point, he was given a tap on his shoulder by the woman witnesses say ran from the building taking credit for the murder, the woman, for some reason forgotten by the investigation. Sirhan reported that he found himself at a pistol range, holding a gun he had never seen before. He heard firing, two shots rang out. He says he never fired the shots. Numerous witnesses support this.
Willam Pepper and Sirhan
As for Sirhan and the woman, interviews revealed that Sirhan had a deep sexual obsession her. What we are not told is how he came to know her. In fact, interviews tend to establish that Sirhan himself didn’t know how he came to know her or the basis for his strong feelings.Sirhan also has no conscious knowledge of visiting the pistol range that his reported “hypnotic delusion” placed him at during the Kennedy shooting.
An almost identical shooting occurred in 1981. John Hinckley Jr., shot President Ronald Reagan outside the Washington Hilton Hotel.
The reported reason was Hinckley’s “sexual obsession” with actress Jody Foster. The Sirhan Sirhan “sexual obsession” aspect of the Kennedy assassination was known to authorities and members of the press but no connection was ever made. It is being made now.
Are there other relevant facts that should have led to a further investigation?
John Hinckley - Looking into His Future
Hinckley, a Mormon, belonged to a family closely aligned with the Bush family. Then Vice President George H.W. Bush, was a former CIA Director and had been named by the Warren Report as a person of interest unless there was another “George Bush of Texas” that moved in CIA and political circles.
Reports from close associations of President Reagan now tell of his total distrust of Bush and his deep resentment at having Bush on the ticket with him. Insiders report that Bush was “frozen out” of all White House and national security functions. Stories to the contrary, including those stating that Reagan showed an onset of Alzheimer’s as early as 1983 are said to be wildly inaccurate.
“Reagan was ‘on his game’ and took personal charge of foreign police and security issues. He ordered that Bush be kept out of
A Young Jodie Foster
everything. He didn’t trust him. “
Lee Wanta.
The 1968 murder of Martin Luther King, under close examination, seems equally spurious with reexaminations of the case and mock trials favoring the direct involvement of police and intelligence agencies in the killing.
When you add the 1963 assassination of John F. Kennedy into the mix, something emerges that is far more than a simple pattern. What you have is an epidemic of carefully conceived political killings with one theme that runs throughout, that of the “patsy.”
James Earl Ray, John Hinckley Jr., Sirhan Sirhan and Lee Harvey Oswald are more than just ‘unlikely’ killers. They were ideal candidates for “framing.”
KENNEDY, LOS ANGELES 1968
Robert Kennedy’s Last Moments
It was 1968 and Robert F. Kennedy was a shoo-in for president. He had just won the California primary and was at a party function at the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles. Shots rang out, and Sirhan Sirhan was wrestled to the ground by footballer Rosy Grier. Sirhan, if we can call him by one name only, was not the shooter, this has been long established and easily proven even without heading into the area of conspiracy. The shooters were pursued out of the building, reportedly a woman screamed out, “We killed Kennedy!” as she ran out the rear exit.Police had an “all points bulletin” out for suspects, there were descriptions and witness statements, it was in the newspapers then, for some strange reason, as though the hand of G-d reached out, reality was erased and the manhunt was as though it had never happened.
Forensic evidence showed Kennedy was shot from behind and that Sirhan Sirhan could not have been the shooter. This has never been disputed.
Court documents allege what can only be described as “mind control.” Nothing attributed to the defense claim, as submitted by attorney William Pepper, who also represented James Early Ray, departs from the strict definition of “hypnosis,” though the CIA had spent millions on programs that strayed into that region, mind control and, in fact, well beyond. “Mind control” was considered pretty tame stuff compared to the “remote viewing” and “psycho-kinetic energy” studies that went on for over a decade.
The CIA became obsessed with mind control after prisoners of war held by the Chinese, Russians and North Koreans returned showing symptoms of something far beyond simple indoctrination. Some had been successfully programmed as deep cover agents. Because of the classification level of all documents and studies involving this threat, even to this day there is only fiction to draw upon, films such as the Manchurian Candidate and Telefon or the recent blockbuster video game, Call of Duty Black Ops (spoiler alert) which “alleges” Kennedy’s murder was directly tied to “mind control.”
Is “pop culture” bridging the gap between disinformation and reality?
REAGAN AND THE KENNEDY’S HAD ENEMIES…
Reagan Security Caught From Behind
There are several issues that may tie the 3 shootings together. Despite the conspiracy theories, reports from many directions indicate that all three men shared one powerful and very “third rail” belief. All wished to see an end to the privately owned banking system that they believed was pushing America into financial insolvency.All three, Reagan and the Kennedy’s had sought economic counsel regarding the dismemberment of the Federal Reserve System. All three shared this one belief, that the Federal Reserve represents a threat against American sovereignty and is an instrument of defacto foreign control of a vital element of American security, control of currency and debt.
Could there be a greater motive than this? In 1963, Kennedy had ordered the Treasury Department to prepare to issue non-Federal Reserve currency. That order was never carried out.
A second Bush president tripled America’s debt in a 5 year period. Was this what Reagan had foreseen also? This is what we are told, perhaps it may be time to “really” reassess Reagan also.
Does anyone remember the “cakewalk war” that would last six weeks, cost $50-$60 billion, and be paid for out of Iraqi oil revenues?
Does anyone remember that White House economist Lawrence Lindsey was fired by Dubya because Lindsey estimated that the Iraq war could cost as much as $200 billion?
Lindsey was fired for over-estimating the cost of a war that, according to Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes, has cost 15 times more than Lindsey estimated. And the US still has 50,000 troops in Iraq.
Does anyone remember that just prior to the US invasion of Iraq, the US government declared victory over the Taliban in Afghanistan?
Does anyone remember that the reason Dubya gave for invading Iraq was Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, weapons that the US government knew did not exist?
Are Americans aware that the same neoconservatives who made these fantastic mistakes, or told these fabulous lies, are still in control of the government in Washington?
The “war on terror” is now in its tenth year. What is it really all about?
The bottom line answer is that the “war on terror” is about creating real terrorists. The US government desperately needs real terrorists in order to justify its expansion of its wars against Muslim countries and to keep the American people sufficiently fearful that they continue to accept the police state that provides “security from terrorists,” but not from the government that has discarded civil liberties.
The US government creates terrorists by invading Muslim countries, wrecking infrastructure and killing vast numbers of civilians. The US also creates terrorists by installing puppet governments to rule over Muslims and by using the puppet governments to murder and persecute citizens as is occurring on a vast scale in Pakistan today.
Neoconservatives used 9/11 to launch their plan for US world hegemony. Their plan fit with the interests of America’s ruling oligarchies. Wars are good for the profits of the military/security complex, about which President Eisenhower warned us in vain a half century ago. American hegemony is good for the oil industry’s control over resources
the American states were united at war with Great Britain and had just declared their Independance. But what did it mean? What does it mean now? - Independence. This nation acted like one of England’s colonies for hundreds of years and in that time had grown to become one of Great Britain’s most productive resources. Then the French American War began and England came to defend the “colonists” incurring great debts and finally winning the war. Britain decided that it needed to keep troops here even though it did not have sufficient forts and that it could not afford to build such forts; therefore they decided to compel the people here to quarter the British troops in their homes with room and board; for protection of such troops they confiscated the peoples guns; the King also created a sales tax. The rights of the colonists became so abused that it became necessary to stand against Great Britain’s abuse over, “the last straw” — though most of the sales taxes were dropped, on a few key imported items like tea and shugar they went from from 3% to 6%. In response, rather than paying the increased tax, some of the colonists had a party (the Boston Tea Party) and threw a load of tea into the harbor; while others formed the Declaration of Independence and went to war.
When the War was over they formed a new foundational document, The Articles of Confederation, that document recognized this nation as a nation made up of independent sovereign United States, and gave the name “The United States of America” to the new government. Many of the people of this new nation felt that it was wrong to leave England. Sure there were rights violations but those were livable and their future was a certainty as an English Colony. Now that they were on their own nothing at all was sure.
Over the next ten years conditions in this country continually got worse. The individual States gave little regard to any other State and paid nearly no attention at all to the central government. After ten years of independence from Great Britain conditions were far worse than they had ever been under Great Britain’s rule and protection. Many wanted government officials to go back to Great Britain and beg the King to take us back, and they almost did.
“To form a more perfect Union”
That movement was considered too severe to take without first attempting to resolve the problems of this new nation by the sitting of what later became known as the Constitutional Convention. Each of the Sovereign States gave authority to (deputized) a few men to form a college to review and reform the present form of government and to eliminate the errors made in thier first attempt at the Articles of Confederation. In other words those few men were collectively entrusted with the peoples’ sovereign authority to reform the government. The Deputies created a Trust Indenture. Though some people say the Indenture had no title, because there was no Title written in bold letters at its head, its title, “The Constitution for the United States of America”, was given in its Preamble: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquillity, provide for the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”It containes VII Articles, concluding with the signatures of the twelve States’ Deputies present at the convention. Once agreed to on, September 17th, 1787 and signed by the Deputies, the Trust was formed. This Indenture, (Constitution) with the intent and authority of the sovereign people, created a “Constitutional Republic” form of government in trust. Though the Deputies were empowered to reform the government to more perfectly align it with the will of the people, the States had not fully expected that their sovereignty and control over the land would be removed, wherefore the Deputies resolved to take the Trust back to the individual States for their respective ratification. The States conditionally refused ratification until limits were placed upon the new government that would secure man’s God given inherent rights.
Remember, under the Articles of Confederation, these individual States were recognized as individually Sovereign States, which was the problem with the Articles of Confederation, there was no accountability or control over the individual States. Without accountability whoever was in power simply ignored the central government and moved forward literally however they saw fit (in violation of individual rights, or not). In essence, they were each absolutely powerful kingdoms. It was obvious that if something wasn’t done to unite the Union of States as, “United States” they would be destroyed from within or without. So when offered the Trust Indenture, the individual sovereign States’ leaders could see that they would no longer be sovereign if they accepted the Trust, and they would be destroyed if they didn’t accept it.
Not much of a choice, but the war with England ended only a little over ten years earlier and they didn’t want to go back, so they demanded that if they were to give up their sovereignty, the people’s rights must be preserved from the central government. Thus they conditionally refused the Trust until the insisted on “Bill of Rights” were added. Therefore, the Trust document was first created to create a Trust known as the “United States”. The Trust created a government controlled by the Trust. Government officials were set up within the Trust as Trustees with specific defined responsibilities and functions. The People were set up as the beneficiaries of the Trust and when any government official takes office he/she is required to swear an oath of allegiance [make a contract with the people to uphold the Constitution]. Remember, at this point the government has already been created in trust, by the signed Constitution.
As yet the Trust has nobody sitting in the offices of government, however, the States are not willing to support the Trust and authorize its officers to function with control over them unless the people’s rights and the State’s rights are secured. The Conventioneers went back to work to draft the requested, Bill of Rights, which were later provided as the First Ten Amendments to the, Constitution of the United States of America, a document that was created to bind officers in an Oath to uphold the Trust of the people and securing the peoples rights.
Then the Trust, the Constitution for the United States of America (still signed and unchanged from its original version as first presented to the states), along with the “Bill of Rights” as the first ten amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America, were returned to the individual States and were ratified by each of those States and returned to the Constitutional Convention where the new government was made effective and put in operation on or after, December 15th, 1791, the “Effective date of the Constitution which was then rewritten with the Title, The Constitution of the United States of America, including the Bill of Rights.
Now let’s go back and again review the documents created in the process by name. (Names are about to become (more…)
The ‘Audit the Fed’ bill has been watered down by Senator Bernard Sanders right at the last minute (a common strategy: pretend to be a populist, then at the last minute, the politician “gives in” in the spirit of compromise). The Audit the Fed bill could go to vote in the Senate any day now.
Obama opposed the bill, until the rewrite. One can only imagine what type of pressure his administration applied to the Senate.
Bernanke opposed the bill, and even said that an audit of the Fed’s monetary policy could “seriously threaten” the Fed’s independence. This statement couldn’t be more true. The Fed is not bound in any way to transparency and informing the American people how much money the Fed is printing or to whom it is being given, however, the American taxpayers are on the hook for the debt. The Federal Reserve opposes an audit of its monetary policy (what the plans are for the economy and the means by which it will be carried out) because then it would appear in print and the criminal nature of the Fed would become apparent.
The Federal Reserve is a cartel: an agreement between parties to refrain from competition in a true free market, thus creating a monopoly that has extended into an oligarchy (the rule over the masses by a few). The bankers created the bubble that caused the debt, have prolonged recovery by keeping interest rates low and monetizing the debt. Obama’s Financial Reform Bill will create perpetual bailouts for the bankers. Bailouts are not anything new, in the past, many large entities like Amtrak, New York City and Chrysler have been bailed out by the taxpayer, the difference now is that it is moving at a breakneck pace. The bankers control the economy and have overwhelming influence over Congress and government.
Unless the Audit the Fed bill passes in its original form, with the full audit conducted by the Government Accounting Office (GAO), it would be unlikely that the American taxpayers would actually find out which banks received the bailout money, how much money and under what conditions. G. Edward Griffin, author of the classic book, ‘The Creature From Jekyll Island’ pointed out that an audit (that lacks GAO direction) would only result in a whitewash- the appointed auditors would likely be a commission comprised of friends of the Fed, it would be narrow and superficial. It would give the impression something was being done,and after a long time, theaudit report would be cover-up, assuring the people that everything was fine. An example of this is the 9/11 “Omission Report” that completely neglected the most damning evidence: Building 7.
Having said that, the ‘Audit the Fed’ bill is important, in its original form, because it is has alerted the (more…)
SIRHAN SIRHAN - GOOD REASON TO BE ANGRY?
Willam Pepper and Sirhan
John Hinckley - Looking into His Future
A Young Jodie Foster
Robert Kennedy’s Last Moments
Reagan Security Caught From Behind
Comments Off