Archive for the ‘American Heroes’ Category

Susan Lindauer was a major CIA asset leading up to the 9/11 attacks. She was the main person in charge of communicating back-channel relations between Iraq and the U.S. Because she had inside knowledge that the U.S. knew for months in advance that the 9/11 attack was coming, the U.S. government had her detained under the Patriot Act and imprisoned in a military facility for a year. And then she remained under legal indictment for five years. She was apparently very close to having her brain scrambled via drugs by the government. Hers is a tragic and harrowing story, but her story proves beyond doubt, that corruption exists at the highest levels of the U.S. government. She is a real American Hero.

See this interview with former CIA intelligence asset Susan Lindauer.

And this followup interview: Former CIA Asset Susan Lindauer on naysayers, her post 9/11 story, the Patriot Act, NDAA, and more.

(The text below was taken from the followup interview above, as located on the ActivistPost.com website. Thanks!)

Back in September, we spoke to former CIA asset Susan Lindauer (here and here), in an interview that generated a lot of discussion online. Ms. Lindauer’s story, which completely counteracts the idea that there was no specific intelligence regarding the 9/11 attacks in advance, was received extremely positively by the majority of our audience.

With some message board chatter centering around questions of credibility, we decided to give her the opportunity to set the record straight on her CIA involvement and, in particular, a character assassination piece from the New York Times in April 2004. Susan also picks up her story from where she left off last time, and touches on the Patriot Act and the NDAA 2012.


Read Full Post »

John Taylor Gatto, American hero, is a former New York State and New York City Teacher of the Year and the author of a number of books including Dumbing Us Down: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling, and The Underground History of American Education, which can be read in its entirety online at his website. He was a participant in the Harper’s Magazine forum “School on a Hill,” which appeared in the September 2001 issue. The reason that I see Gatto as a hero is because he was willing to stand up and tell the truth, and he has done so admirably.

(The following article first appeared in September 2003 issue of Harper’s Magazine. Thanks!)

Against School

By John Taylor Gatto

How public education cripples our kids, and why

I taught for thirty years in some of the worst schools in Manhattan, and in some of the best, and during that time I became an expert in boredom. Boredom was everywhere in my world, and if you asked the kids, as I often did, why they felt so bored, they always gave the same answers: They said the work was stupid, that it made no sense, that they already knew it. They said they wanted to be doing something real, not just sitting around. They said teachers didn’t seem to know much about their subjects and clearly weren’t interested in learning more. And the kids were right: their teachers were every bit as bored as they were.

Boredom is the common condition of schoolteachers, and anyone who has spent time in a teachers’ lounge can vouch for the low energy, the whining, the dispirited attitudes, to be found there. When asked why they feel bored, the teachers tend to blame the kids, as you might expect. Who wouldn’t get bored teaching students who are rude and interested only in grades? If even that. Of course, teachers are themselves products of the same twelve-year compulsory school programs that so thoroughly bore their students, and as school personnel they are trapped inside structures even more rigid than those imposed upon the children. Who, then, is to blame?

We all are. My grandfather taught me that. One afternoon when I was seven I complained to him of boredom, and he batted me hard on the head. He told me that I was never to use that term in his presence again, that if I was bored it was my fault and no one else’s. The obligation to amuse and instruct myself was entirely my own, and people who didn’t know that were childish people, to be avoided if possible. Certainly not to be trusted. That episode cured me of boredom forever, and here and there over the years I was able to pass on the lesson to some remarkable student. For the most part, however, I found it futile to challenge the official notion that boredom and childishness were the natural state of affairs in the classroom. Often I had to defy custom, and even bend the law, to help kids break out of this trap.

The empire struck back, of course; childish adults regularly conflate opposition with disloyalty. I once returned from a medical leave to discover that all evidence of my having been granted the leave had been purposely destroyed, that my job had been terminated, and that I no longer possessed even a teaching license. After nine months of tormented effort I was able to retrieve the license when a school secretary testified to witnessing the plot unfold. In the meantime my family suffered more than I care to remember. By the time I finally retired in 1991, I had more than enough reason to think of our schools – with their long-term, cell-block-style, forced confinement of both students and teachers – as virtual factories of childishness. Yet I honestly could not see why they had to be that way. My own experience had revealed to me what many other teachers must learn along the way, too, yet keep to themselves for fear of reprisal: if we wanted to we could easily and inexpensively jettison the old, stupid structures and help kids take an education rather than merely receive a schooling. We could encourage the best qualities of youthfulness – curiosity, adventure, resilience, the capacity for surprising insight – simply by being more flexible about time, texts, and tests, by introducing kids to truly competent adults, and by giving each student what autonomy he or she needs in order to take a risk every now and then.

But we don’t do that. And the more I asked why not, and persisted in thinking about the “problem” of schooling as an engineer might, the more I missed the point: What if there is no “problem” with our schools? What if they are the way they are, so expensively flying in the face of common sense and long experience in how children learn things, not because they are doing something wrong but because they are doing something right? Is it possible that George W. Bush accidentally spoke the truth when he said we would “leave no child behind”? Could it be that our schools are designed to make sure not one of them ever really grows up?

Do we really need school? I don’t mean education, just forced schooling: six classes a day, five days a week, nine months a year, for twelve years. Is this deadly routine really necessary? And if so, for what? Don’t hide behind reading, writing, and arithmetic as a rationale, because 2 million happy homeschoolers have surely put that banal justification to rest. Even if they hadn’t, a considerable number of well-known Americans never went through the twelve-year wringer our kids currently go through, and they turned out all right. George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln? Someone taught them, to be sure, but they were not products of a school system, and not one of them was ever “graduated” from a secondary school. Throughout most of American history, kids generally didn’t go to high school, yet the unschooled rose to be admirals, like Farragut; inventors, like Edison; captains of industry, like Carnegie and Rockefeller; writers, like Melville and Twain and Conrad; and even scholars, like Margaret Mead. In fact, until pretty recently people who reached the age of thirteen weren’t looked upon as children at all. Ariel Durant, who co-wrote an enormous, and very good, multivolume history of the world with her husband, Will, was happily married at fifteen, and who could reasonably claim that Ariel Durant was an uneducated person? Unschooled, perhaps, but not uneducated.

We have been taught (that is, schooled) in this country to think of “success” as synonymous with, or at least dependent upon, “schooling,” but historically that isn’t true in either an intellectual or a financial sense. And plenty of people throughout the world today find a way to educate themselves without resorting to a system of compulsory secondary schools that all too often resemble prisons. Why, then, do Americans confuse education with just such a system? What exactly is the purpose of our public schools?

Mass schooling of a compulsory nature really got its teeth into the United States between 1905 and 1915, though it was conceived of much earlier and pushed for throughout most of the nineteenth century. The reason given for this enormous upheaval of family life and cultural traditions was, roughly speaking, threefold:
1) To make good people.
2) To make good citizens.
3) To make each person his or her personal best.

These goals are still trotted out today on a regular basis, and most of us accept them in one form or another as a decent definition of public education’s mission, however short schools actually fall in achieving them. But we are dead wrong. Compounding our error is the fact that the national literature holds numerous and surprisingly consistent statements of compulsory schooling’s true purpose. We have, for example, the great H. L. Mencken, who wrote in The American Mercury for April 1924 that the aim of public education is not to fill the young of the species with knowledge and awaken their intelligence. . . . Nothing could be further from the truth. The aim.. . is simply to reduce as many individuals as possible to the same safe level, to breed and train a standardized citizenry, to put down dissent and originality. That is its aim in the United States . . . and that is its aim everywhere else.

Because of Mencken’s reputation as a satirist, we might be tempted to dismiss this passage as a bit of hyperbolic sarcasm. His article, however, goes on to trace the template for our own educational system back to the now vanished, though never to be forgotten, military state of Prussia. And although he was certainly aware of the irony that we had recently been at war with Germany, the heir to Prussian thought and culture, Mencken was being perfectly serious here. Our educational system really is Prussian in origin, and that really is cause for concern.

The odd fact of a Prussian provenance for our schools pops up again and again once you know to look for it. William James alluded to it many times at the turn of the century. Orestes Brownson, the hero of Christopher Lasch’s 1991 book, The True and Only Heaven, was publicly denouncing the Prussianization of American schools back in the 1840s. Horace Mann’s “Seventh Annual Report” to the Massachusetts State Board of Education in 1843 is essentially a paean to the land of Frederick the Great and a call for its schooling to be brought here. That Prussian culture loomed large in America is hardly surprising, given our early association with that utopian state. A Prussian served as Washington’s aide during the Revolutionary War, and so many German- speaking people had settled here by 1795 that Congress considered publishing a German-language edition of the federal laws. But what shocks is that we should so eagerly have adopted one of the very worst aspects of Prussian culture: an educational system deliberately designed to produce mediocre intellects, to hamstring the inner life, to deny students appreciable leadership skills, and to ensure docile and incomplete citizens – all in order to render the populace “manageable.”

It was from James Bryant Conant – president of Harvard for twenty years, WWI poison-gas specialist, WWII executive on the atomic-bomb project, high commissioner of the American zone in Germany after WWII, and truly one of the most influential figures of the twentieth century – that I first got wind of the real purposes of American schooling. Without Conant, we would probably not have the same style and degree of standardized testing that we enjoy today, nor would we be blessed with gargantuan high schools that warehouse 2,000 to 4,000 students at a time, like the famous Columbine High in Littleton, Colorado. Shortly after I retired from teaching I picked up Conant’s 1959 book-length essay, The Child the Parent and the State, and was more than a little intrigued to see him mention in passing that the modern schools we attend were the result of a “revolution” engineered between 1905 and 1930. A revolution? He declines to elaborate, but he does direct the curious and the uninformed to Alexander Inglis’s 1918 book, Principles of Secondary Education, in which “one saw this revolution through the eyes of a revolutionary.”

Inglis, for whom a lecture in education at Harvard is named, makes it perfectly clear that compulsory schooling on this continent was intended to be just what it had been for Prussia in the 1820s: a fifth column into the burgeoning democratic movement that threatened to give the peasants and the proletarians a voice at the bargaining table. Modern, industrialized, compulsory schooling was to make a sort of surgical incision into the prospective unity of these underclasses. Divide children by subject, by age-grading, by constant rankings on tests, and by many other more subtle means, and it was unlikely that the ignorant mass of mankind, separated in childhood, would ever reintegrate into a dangerous whole.

Inglis breaks down the purpose – the actual purpose – of modem schooling into six basic functions, any one of which is enough to curl the hair of those innocent enough to believe the three traditional goals listed earlier:

1) The adjustive or adaptive function. Schools are to establish fixed habits of reaction to authority. This, of course, precludes critical judgment completely. It also pretty much destroys the idea that useful or interesting material should be taught, because you can’t test for reflexive obedience until you know whether you can make kids learn, and do, foolish and boring things.

2) The integrating function. This might well be called “the conformity function,” because its intention is to make children as alike as possible. People who conform are predictable, and this is of great use to those who wish to harness and manipulate a large labor force.

3) The diagnostic and directive function. School is meant to determine each student’s proper social role. This is done by logging evidence mathematically and anecdotally on cumulative records. As in “your permanent record.” Yes, you do have one.

4) The differentiating function. Once their social role has been “diagnosed,” children are to be sorted by role and trained only so far as their destination in the social machine merits – and not one step further. So much for making kids their personal best.

5) The selective function. This refers not to human choice at all but to Darwin’s theory of natural selection as applied to what he called “the favored races.” In short, the idea is to help things along by consciously attempting to improve the breeding stock. Schools are meant to tag the unfit – with poor grades, remedial placement, and other punishments – clearly enough that their peers will accept them as inferior and effectively bar them from the reproductive sweepstakes. That’s what all those little humiliations from first grade onward were intended to do: wash the dirt down the drain.

6) The propaedeutic function. The societal system implied by these rules will require an elite group of caretakers. To that end, a small fraction of the kids will quietly be taught how to manage this continuing project, how to watch over and control a population deliberately dumbed down and declawed in order that government might proceed unchallenged and corporations might never want for obedient labor.

That, unfortunately, is the purpose of mandatory public education in this country. And lest you take Inglis for an isolated crank with a rather too cynical take on the educational enterprise, you should know that he was hardly alone in championing these ideas. Conant himself, building on the ideas of Horace Mann and others, campaigned tirelessly for an American school system designed along the same lines. Men like George Peabody, who funded the cause of mandatory schooling throughout the South, surely understood that the Prussian system was useful in creating not only a harmless electorate and a servile labor force but also a virtual herd of mindless consumers. In time a great number of industrial titans came to recognize the enormous profits to be had by cultivating and tending just such a herd via public education, among them Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller.

There you have it. Now you know. We don’t need Karl Marx’s conception of a grand warfare between the classes to see that it is in the interest of complex management, economic or political, to dumb people down, to demoralize them, to divide them from one another, and to discard them if they don’t conform. Class may frame the proposition, as when Woodrow Wilson, then president of Princeton University, said the following to the New York City School Teachers Association in 1909: “We want one class of persons to have a liberal education, and we want another class of persons, a very much larger class, of necessity, in every society, to forgo the privileges of a liberal education and fit themselves to perform specific difficult manual tasks.” But the motives behind the disgusting decisions that bring about these ends need not be class-based at all. They can stem purely from fear, or from the by now familiar belief that “efficiency” is the paramount virtue, rather than love, liberty, laughter, or hope. Above all, they can stem from simple greed.

There were vast fortunes to be made, after all, in an economy based on mass production and organized to favor the large corporation rather than the small business or the family farm. But mass production required mass consumption, and at the turn of the twentieth century most Americans considered it both unnatural and unwise to buy things they didn’t actually need. Mandatory schooling was a godsend on that count. School didn’t have to train kids in any direct sense to think they should consume nonstop, because it did something even better: it encouraged them not to think at all. And that left them sitting ducks for another great invention of the modem era – marketing.

Now, you needn’t have studied marketing to know that there are two groups of people who can always be convinced to consume more than they need to: addicts and children. School has done a pretty good job of turning our children into addicts, but it has done a spectacular job of turning our children into children. Again, this is no accident. Theorists from Plato to Rousseau to our own Dr. Inglis knew that if children could be cloistered with other children, stripped of responsibility and independence, encouraged to develop only the trivializing emotions of greed, envy, jealousy, and fear, they would grow older but never truly grow up. In the 1934 edition of his once well-known book Public Education in the United States, Ellwood P. Cubberley detailed and praised the way the strategy of successive school enlargements had extended childhood by two to six years, and forced schooling was at that point still quite new. This same Cubberley – who was dean of Stanford’s School of Education, a textbook editor at Houghton Mifflin, and Conant’s friend and correspondent at Harvard – had written the following in the 1922 edition of his book Public School Administration: “Our schools are . . . factories in which the raw products (children) are to be shaped and fashioned.. . . And it is the business of the school to build its pupils according to the specifications laid down.”

It’s perfectly obvious from our society today what those specifications were. Maturity has by now been banished from nearly every aspect of our lives. Easy divorce laws have removed the need to work at relationships; easy credit has removed the need for fiscal self-control; easy entertainment has removed the need to learn to entertain oneself; easy answers have removed the need to ask questions. We have become a nation of children, happy to surrender our judgments and our wills to political exhortations and commercial blandishments that would insult actual adults. We buy televisions, and then we buy the things we see on the television. We buy computers, and then we buy the things we see on the computer. We buy $150 sneakers whether we need them or not, and when they fall apart too soon we buy another pair. We drive SUVs and believe the lie that they constitute a kind of life insurance, even when we’re upside-down in them. And, worst of all, we don’t bat an eye when Ari Fleischer tells us to “be careful what you say,” even if we remember having been told somewhere back in school that America is the land of the free. We simply buy that one too. Our schooling, as intended, has seen to it.

Now for the good news. Once you understand the logic behind modern schooling, its tricks and traps are fairly easy to avoid. School trains children to be employees and consumers; teach your own to be leaders and adventurers. School trains children to obey reflexively; teach your own to think critically and independently. Well-schooled kids have a low threshold for boredom; help your own to develop an inner life so that they’ll never be bored. Urge them to take on the serious material, the grown-up material, in history, literature, philosophy, music, art, economics, theology – all the stuff schoolteachers know well enough to avoid. Challenge your kids with plenty of solitude so that they can learn to enjoy their own company, to conduct inner dialogues. Well-schooled people are conditioned to dread being alone, and they seek constant companionship through the TV, the computer, the cell phone, and through shallow friendships quickly acquired and quickly abandoned. Your children should have a more meaningful life, and they can.

First, though, we must wake up to what our schools really are: laboratories of experimentation on young minds, drill centers for the habits and attitudes that corporate society demands. Mandatory education serves children only incidentally; its real purpose is to turn them into servants. Don’t let your own have their childhoods extended, not even for a day. If David Farragut could take command of a captured British warship as a preteen, if Thomas Edison could publish a broadsheet at the age of twelve, if Ben Franklin could apprentice himself to a printer at the same age (then put himself through a course of study that would choke a Yale senior today), there’s no telling what your own kids could do. After a long life, and thirty years in the public school trenches, I’ve concluded that genius is as common as dirt. We suppress our genius only because we haven’t yet figured out how to manage a population of educated men and women. The solution, I think, is simple and glorious. Let them manage themselves.

Read Full Post »

(The article below was taken from the Infowars.net website. Thanks!)

Note: You can now watch America: From Freedom To Fascism for free on YouTube.

Russo Film Exposes Criminal Banking Syndicate That Rules America

Steve Watson & Alex Jones / Infowars.net | October 25 2006

Click here to order America: Freedom to Fascism now. See below for the trailer.

In 1913 America was a free country. Then a band of powerful bankers achieved their fathers’ and great grandfathers’ goal. America has never been the same. Soon the world will not be the same.

Aaron Russo expertly exposes the traitorous Federal Reserve Act and the fact that there is no law that stipulates American citizens have to pay income taxes. The ratification of the 16th amendment, also known as the “Tax amendment”, represents a fundamental undermining of Constitutional law in America. It is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated against the American people by the elite private banking institutions that have usurped government as an arm of their overall control mechanism.

Russo presents interviews with an impressive range of government officials, IRS special agents , FBI officers, Politicians and tax attorneys who have researched and subsequently campaigned against the Federal Reserve Act and thus reveals why the IRS is an illegal foundation.

The income tax does not meet either criteria of Constitutionally legal taxation in America, that is direct apportioned tax or indirect uniform tax. The IRS claims that the 16th Amendment allowed for a third form of taxation, however, the Supreme court ruling on the amendment states that it allows for no new forms of taxation. More supreme court cases in the same period confirm the same conclusion. The 16th Amendment did not allow the Federal Government to levy a new tax, thus there is no Constitutional basis for the income tax.

The findings of the Grace Commission, a Blue-Ribbon panel appointed by President Ronald Reagan found that:

“One hundred percent of what is collected is absorbed solely by interest on the federal debt. All individual income tax revenues are gone before one nickel is spent on the services taxpayers expect from government.”

Education, health and community up keep is paid for out of state and local property taxes, gas taxes, liquor taxes, you name it. Proceeds from the income tax do not pay for these things.The income tax money goes to pay for defense and the expansion of corporate America. In essence everyday American people are funding expansionist wars and the playboy lifestyle of the financial institutions that then further profit from that activity and become ever more powerful.

The income tax is the tool of totalitarianism. It is the means by which the corporate controlled government manipulates the people on a mass scale and locks them into servitude. If the people do not know what their rights are then an agency that knowingly breaks the law is not going to tell them.

The banks now control America. They print the currency and tell the people what it’s worth. They have the legal right to counterfeit money. This coup d’etat of benign open and accountable government by elitist private interest represents the tipping point from freedom and the long slide towards fascism. Since the government’s primary goal stopped being the welfare of the people it has ceased to exist as a legal entity.

This is exactly what Thomas Jefferson warned the American people may happen. Jefferson said:

“If the American people ever allow the banks to control the issuance of their currency…the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property, until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.”

Russo, the award winning filmmaker who produced “The Rose” and “Trading Places”, confronts the IRS in Washington and is quickly reprimanded by Homeland Security. He discovers that those who have stood up to the income tax slave system and simply asked the question “where is the law?” have been slandered and personally attacked because to reduce the issue to a rational debate would immediately expose the truth behind the entire scam.

Russo discovers that this has not come about by accident it is a planned and coordinated agenda. The younger generations have no concept that they have been drawn into a trap from which they cannot escape. The middle class is being systematically and purposefully wiped out, leaving behind a population on the brink of serfdom. The purchasing power of the dollar has been destroyed BY DESIGN, leaving behind a cost of living only affordable to those who profit from the system.

New laws passed through Congress seek to further enslave people by making it harder to declare bankruptcy while at the same time allowing the banks to charge huge amounts of interest. thus both parties, working with the banks, legally enslave the nation.

The people of America are being fed upon by the elite and devoured alive and they barely even recognize it. It is the perfect crime, the pinnacle of criminal capitalism

It is with this in mind that Russo delves deep into the big brother control agenda and places it succinctly within the context it needs to be understood in. What is being sold to the American people today as patriotism is fascism, and it is part of the same overall agenda to rape the people financially, spiritually and mentally. This is the only place to go to get more out of America. If you can literally control the movements people make and the actions they take then you own their world.

You need to see this film now. In one hour and forty nine minutes Aaron Russo spells out what is at stake and what happened when the American people stopped questioning and started trusting their government.

Read Full Post »

(The following is from nbcwashington.com. Thanks!)

SPJ Retires Helen Thomas Award

Monday, Jan 17, 2011

The Helen Thomas Lifetime Achievement Award won’t even last as long as its namesake’s lifetime.

The Society of Professional Journalists, which has given out the award since 2000, decided Friday to retire the award following complaints about it after Thomas‘ remarks last year regarding Jews in Palestine.

The SPJ decided not to rename the award or take the columnist’s name off of it, but rather to send it into retirement.

That’s not where Thomas is headed, however. The 90-year-old veteran newswoman recently began writing a column again — this time for the Falls Church News-Press. Upon announcing Thomas’ return to print, News-Press founder, owner and editor Nicholas Benton said he was “honored” to give Thomas “the proverbial ‘second chance’.”

“She is progressive, and following my more than eight hours of direct, one-on-one talks with her since the events of last June, I remain firmly convinced that she is neither bigoted, nor racist, nor anti-Semitic,” Benton wrote. “Her remarks in June were in response to a question about Israel, not Jews, and were intended to mean that in these times, Jewish people are free to live wherever they wish, because the era of anti-Jewish persecution is ended. That was not adequately expressed because of the impromptu nature of the incident.”

Many who complained to the SPJ didn’t see things the same way.

“This episode was a sad final chapter to an otherwise illustrious career as a trailblazer for women and minorities in journalism,” wrote Abraham H. Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League. “Unlike her first off-the-cuff remarks into a camera, Thomas’ comments were carefully thought out and reveal a person who is deeply infected with anti-Semitism.”

The SPJ said that it believes Thomas has the right to free speech, no matter if it is considered to be unpopular, vile or is considered offensive. But the SPJ said the controversy has overshadowed the reason the award exists — for a lifetime of contribution and service to the journalism profession.

“No individual worthy of such honor should have to face this controversy,” the SPJ said on its website. “No honoree should have to decide if the possible backlash is worth being recognized for his or her contribution to journalism.”


In regard to the statement  … wrote Abraham H. Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League. “Unlike her first off-the-cuff remarks into a camera, Thomas’ comments were carefully thought out and reveal a person who is deeply infected with anti-Semitism.”

What I have to say is that this is the standard response to criticism of Israeli government policy: attack the person as racist, anti-Semitic. It is obvious that she is criticizing Israeli policy, not Jewish people, but Foxman equates criticizing Israeli policy with anti-Semitism. I say horseshit. This is not true, he knows it, and so does anyone else with half a brain cell that’s paying attention, but everyone is afraid to actually say it. Foxman WANTS this to be true, and he knows that if he keeps repeating this mantra, some people will actually come to fear and accept this nonsense. By the way, and just to be clear about this, Helen Thomas is a Palestinian, she IS A SEMITE. Palestinians ARE SEMITES. This is a perfect and often used example of complete and utter bullying propaganda by a dishonest and mean-spirited Zionist spokesperson. What a jerk.

The Society of Professional Journalists are chickenshits for removing the Helen Thomas Lifetime Achievement Award. They don’t have the courage to stand up for the truth like Helen did. History will show that taking this away from her was a mean and cowardly act. They don’t deserve the honor of keeping any award in Helen Thomas’ name. Helen was a true hero throughout her entire career as a journalist, especially in the last exchange where speaking the truth got her fired.

In part one of his interview with Helen Thomas, longest-serving member of the White House Press Corps, Paul Jay asks her about her first question for President Obama. The question, asking President Obama to name all the countries in the Middle-East that have nuclear weapons, was avoided by the President, who claimed to not want to “speculate”. Thomas claims that knowledge of Israeli nukes is very public in DC and Obama’s answer shows a lack of credibility. She explains the importance of this question for U.S. policy in the region. Finally, she confides that she has not been called on by the President since that day, but that if she does, she will ask him whether or not he has found any more information about nukes in the Middle-East since their last encounter.

(The following article was taken from the imemc.org website. Thanks!)

US Journalist Helen Thomas: “I’m not anti-Jewish, I’m anti-Zionist”

author Saturday March 19, 2011 16:31author by Saed Bannoura – IMEMC News Report post

Former White House correspondent Helen Thomas, 89, who was fired last year after making controversial comments about Israel, told Playboy magazine in a feature interview that her comments were misinterpreted by the media, but that she stood by her critique of Israel.

Helen Thomas (photo by the Examiner)
Helen Thomas (photo by the Examiner)

Playboy contributing editor David Hochman interviewed Thomas in her Washington DC home for a full-length feature in Playboy magazine, giving Thomas a chance to explain herself. Her career of over 50 years as a White House correspondent came to an abrupt end last May when Rabbi David Nesenoff approached Thomas with a camcorder outside the White House and asked her what she thought of Israel. Thomas responded “I think they should get the hell out of Palestine.”

When asked, in a followup question, where she thought they should go, Thomas said that they should go home to Poland, Germany and the other countries where they came from. In the Playboy interview, she explained the statement, “ What I meant was they should stay where they are because they’re not being persecuted—not since World War II, not since 1945. If they were, we sure would hear about it. Instead, they initiated the Jackson-Vanik law, which said the U.S. would not trade with Russia unless it allowed unlimited Jewish emigration. But it was not immigration to the United States, which would have been fine with me. It was to go to Palestine and uproot these people, throw them out of their homes, which they have done through several wars. That’s not fair. I want people to understand why the Palestinians are upset. They are incarcerated and living in an open prison.”

Hochman asked Thomas if she knew how controversial her statements were, she said that she was “going for broke”, because she was fed up with how the Palestinians had been treated for decades. She said, “Sure, the Israelis have a right to exist—but where they were born, not to come and take someone else’s home. I’ve had it up to here with the violations against the Palestinians.”

In response to a question about Palestinian violence and suicide bombings, Thomas told Hochman, “Of course I don’t condone any violence against anyone. But who wouldn’t fight for their country? What would any American do if their land was being taken? Remember Pearl Harbor. The Palestinian violence is to protect what little remains of Palestine. The suicide bombers act out of despair and desperation. Three generations of Palestinians have been forced out of their homes—by Israelis—and into refugee camps. And the Israelis are still bulldozing Palestinians’ homes in East Jerusalem. Remember, Menachem Begin invented terrorism as his MO—and bragged about it in his first book. That’s how Israel was created, aided and abetted by U.S. money and arms.”

Thomas has always had a reputation for being a tough reporter who was not afraid to ask difficult questions to whoever was in power in the White House, questioning Bush policies of extraordinary rendition and torture, as well as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. When she was fired last year after her controversial comments, most of her former colleagues distanced themselves from her, although a few reporters did stand by her.

In the interview with Playboy, Thomas railed against what she called the Zionist lobby in the US, which she claims controls what happens in Congress and the White House. But when confronted about her legacy, and how she will be remembered when she dies, Thomas began crying, saying that the obituary writers would remember her as an anti-Semite, but that would not be an accurate rendering of her life and her beliefs.

When asked how she would like to be remembered, she said, “As the person who asked why. That’s what I want as my epitaph: ‘Why?’ It’s always been my favorite question, even though it rarely gets answered. As I said before, because of what happened recently, people are going to remember me a certain way. The truth is, I don’t hate anybody. I care deeply about people. I care for the poor, the sick, the lame, the harmed, those who’ve been treated unjustly… I’ve always cared about what happens in the world, and I think what the Israelis are doing is wrong. We have to care about our fellow man, and we don’t. Somehow we’ve lost that sense. It’s become almost a sin to care. But we are all God’s children, right?”

Read Full Post »

(This article was taken from the history-matters.com website. Thanks!)

The Assassinations of the 1960s as “Deep Events”

Peter Dale Scott
October 17, 2008

For over two years now I have been speaking and writing about what I call deep events. I mean by deep events the traumatic and unexpected episodes that recur periodically in US history and alter it, nearly always for the worse. These deep events can never be properly analyzed or understood, because of an intelligence dimension which results in a socially imposed veil of silence, both in the government and in the Mainstream Media.

The more that I look at these deep events comparatively, ranging over the past five decades, the more similarities I see between them, and the more I understand them in the light of each other. I hope in this paper to use analogies from the murder of JFK and 9/11 to cast new light on the murders of Martin Luther King and Robert F. Kennedy. [1]

I began this analysis in 2006 by comparing the JFK assassination with 9/11. I drew attention to over a dozen similarities, of which today I will be focusing on only four:

1) the remarkable and puzzling speed with which those in power identified what I call the designated culprits (Lee Harvey Oswald and the 19 alleged hijackers),
2) the self-incriminating trail allegedly left by the culprits themselves – such as the bundle that James Earl Ray is said to have conveniently left in a doorway on his way to his car. Oswald was said to have carried a flagrantly falsified draft card identifying himself with the name A.J. Hidell, thus consolidating a link between himself and the Mannlicher-Carcano which had been ordered under that name. [2] Even more spectacularly, Mohamed Atta was said to have left one rental car in the Boston airport, filled with boxcutters and other incriminating items; he then allegedly rented a second car and drove to Maine, where he packed bags with still more self-incriminating material. [3]
3) the CIA’s withholding of relevant information about the designated culprits from the FBI, thus leaving the culprits free to play their allotted roles in Dallas and later on 9/11. I will say more about this.
4) the role of drug-trafficking in both JFK and 9/11 – and indeed in virtually every major deep event since JFK, specifically including MLK, RFK, Watergate, the Letelier assassination, and Iran-Contra.

This hypothesis of an underlying continuity and similarity between JFK, 9/11, and intervening deep events suggests that we should look for some continuing and hostile force within our society to explain them – and not, as we have been encouraged, to blame them on external forces – such as either Castro (in the case of Oswald) or angry Middle Eastern Muslims (in the case of 9/11). I want to suggest that this continuing force, though involving elements from the CIA and other intelligence agencies, should be sought primarily in the CIA’s interface with mob elements and in particular with what I have called the CIA’s global drug connection. [4]

Oswald’s and Sirhan’s Alleged Self-Incriminating Behavior at Rifle Ranges

Let me now look comparatively at JFK, MLK, and RFK – the three major assassinations of the 1960s. I shall deal first with a few local similarities which when taken together suggest plotters with a similar modus operandi behind all these plots. In all three cases there is evidence of trickery in linking the designated culprit to the gun he is supposed to have used. In the case of first Oswald and then Sirhan, the culprits are alleged to have made life easier for investigators by traveling to rifle ranges, in each case at least twice, and then impressing themselves indelibly in the memories of witnesses by aggressively drawing attention to their weapons.

This is what Malcolm H. Price told the Warren Commission about “Oswald” at the Dallas rifle range:

the first time that I saw this person was in September, ….I have heard that he couldn’t drive, but he was driving that day…and he came down and inquired if there was anyone who could sight a scope, a telescope on a rifle, and I told him that I could, and he said, well – he had one that he had mounted and boresighted but it hadn’t been fired on a range….And he fired three shots and he scored bull’s eye with all three – a very tight pattern.  (10 WH 370, emphasis added)

For various reasons the Warren Report rejected this testimony. However there was independent corroboration of Price’s story. At least five other witnesses claimed to have seen Oswald at a rifle range; and one of them, Sterling Wood, established in conversation with Oswald that Oswald was firing a “6.5 Italian carbine” with a “four-power scope.” (26 WH 368). A witness from the Irving Sports Store, Dial Ryder, supplied a purported work ticket with the name Oswald on it, which was an order to have a rifle “mounted… and boresighted” (WR 315). [5] Yet another witness, Mrs. Edith Whitworth, told the FBI that she had directed Oswald to Ryder’s store (26 WH 701; cf. WR 316).

I have argued that all this was concatenated false testimony, to support the early notion, later rejected, that Oswald had killed Kennedy with a gun he had used earlier in the Soviet Union. [6] The more we believe that the Warren Commission was right to reject this concatenated testimony, the more the rejected stories constitute evidence of a conspiracy.

Similarly we find concatenated evidence, some of it apparently false, concerning Sirhan Sirhan and his unusual ammunition at rifle ranges near Los Angeles. Repeatedly Sirhan is said to have talked obsessively with fellow-shooters about his use of high-velocity Mini-mags for target shooting – the type of bullet whose casings were extracted from the gun he used at the Ambassador Hotel. Sirhan allegedly told Ronald Williams, “These Mini-mags are real good. You should get some of these.” [7] Sirhan advised another shooter, David Montellano, “that the mini-mags he was firing cost more, but they were hollow points and spread out more upon impact.” [8] Michael Saccoman “stated that Sirhan brought him over some bullets. They were `mini mags.’ Hollow points extremely high velocity.” [9]

\As in the case of Oswald, there was abundant, almost over-determined corroboration for these claims. Michael Saccoman said Sirhan told him he had bought his mini-mags at the Lock Stock N’ Barrel store. Larry Arnot at Lock Stock N’ Barrel confirmed that a sales slip for mini-mags found in Sirhan’s car (along with an empty box of hollow point mini-mag bullets) was in his handwriting. [10] In addition, Everett C. Buckner, the owner of one range, allegedly said he sold Sirhan “a box of fifty .22 caliber Imperial Brand long-rifle mini-mags, made by Canadian Industries of Montreal.” [11]

Sirhan’s use of hollow point high velocity mini-mags (unusual for target practice, as Saccoman pointed out) was important to establishing that his bullets created Kennedy’s wounds. Sirhan’s gun was a .22 caliber pistol; only a hollow point round could have answered the vital question, “Could a .22 round have mushroomed enough to created a 2 cm wide hole?” [12]

The Warren Commission concluded that Oswald was impersonated at the rifle range, and Malcolm Price saw a “resemblance” when the Commission staff showed him a picture of Jack Ruby’s assistant Larry Crafard. [13] It is possible that on at least one occasion Sirhan was also impersonated at one range. William Marks

identified Sirhan from a police mug shot but described him as twenty to thirty years old, six foot to six foot two, and 215 to 225 pounds, with brown hair. This was at least eight inches too tall, double Sirhan’s weight, and the wrong hair color….Officer Harry Starr [the only other witness] provided the same description. [14]

In both cases, the identity of the witnesses is interesting. Two witnesses of Oswald at the rifle range [15] were employees of the Great Southwest Corporation, the company which after the assassination provided Marina Oswald with first a suspicious manager, and then an even more suspicious lawyer. [16] The two witnesses just cited who identified Sirhan were both police officers from Corona, a suburb of Los Angeles.

In the case of Oswald, I believe the consensus today is that the man married to Marina never visited a rifle range at all, but was impersonated. It is harder to draw the same conclusion about Sirhan Sirhan, because of his unambiguous testimony under oath at the trial that he did visit the San Gabriel Rifle Range on June 4, and on June 1 or 2 did purchase a box of mini-mags at the Lock Stock N’ Barrel. [17]

But Sirhan’s self-incrimination at his trial cannot be taken at face value. For a subsequent examination of 38,000 empty shells from where he allegedly shot at the rifle range never identified one that had been fired from Sirhan’s revolver. [18] On this matter, as on so many others, we have to deal with evidence that Sirhan was programmed to speak and behave in such a way as to make himself appear falsely to be a killer.

The Accused and Their Attorneys: More Self-Incrimination

This draws our attention to odd ways in which both Oswald and James Earl Ray also allegedly acted to incriminate themselves, even after they had been arrested. Oswald, virtually everyone now agrees, was not a Communist, yet there are multiple reports that after he was arrested, he helped depict himself as a Communist, by asking for the well-known Communist lawyer John Abt to represent him as his attorney. [19] Analogously, James Earl Ray (according to those who have interrogated and investigated him at length) was not a racist, yet he strengthened the media depiction of himself as a racist (which was used to convict him) by asking two notorious racist attorneys, Arthur J. Hanes Sr. and J.B Stoner, to represent him. [20]

In both cases the evidence for this odd self-incrimination is both abundant and problematic. In the case of Oswald, ABC News reported that Oswald “leaned into ABC microphones and said he would like to contact a Mr. Abt of New York City to serve as his attorney.” [21] In all, “Six public officials, three newsmen, a Dallas lawyer, an acquaintance of Oswald and even his own mother indicated that Oswald specifically asked for Abt.” [22] Yet we have no direct evidence of Oswald requesting this, despite his TV appearances after the assassination.

In the case of Ray, we have Ray’s statement in his book that in England, after his arrest, he himself wrote a letter to Arthur Hanes, asking Hanes to represent him. [23] It was some time later that, through the intervention of his brother Jerry, Ray acquired the attorneys Richard J. Ryan of Memphis, allegedly the head of Governor Wallace’s presidential campaign in Tennessee, and J.B. Stoner. [24]

One striking common denominator between all three murders is that in each case defendants were disastrously represented by lawyers who had previously represented mob figures. Jack Ruby was convicted after being represented by Melvin Belli, who earlier had represented both Mickey Cohen and Cohen’s protégé, the stripper Candy Barr who was a friend of Jack Ruby. [25] After his conviction Ruby was briefly represented by Percy Foreman, who previously had represented the Dallas Mafia chieftain Joseph Civello. [26] (Foreman quit after only four days.) [27] Foreman would later replace Hanes as Ray’s attorney and be responsible for railroading him. [28] Finally Sirhan Sirhan was outrageously “defended” by Russell Parsons, [29] who had earlier represented Los Angeles mob figures Mickey Cohen, Herbert “Happy” Meltzer, and Joseph Sica (Meltzer and Sica were both notorious narcotics traffickers). [30] Parsons was eventually replaced by Grant Cooper, [31] after Cooper finished defending one of those found guilty, along with mob figure John Roselli, in the notorious Friars Club gambling case. [32]

Recently Ray’s brother, John Larry Ray, has written that Ray was instructed to engage Hanes as his attorney. [33] James Earl Ray himself, in testimony to the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) and later in his book Who Killed Martin Luther King?, has indicated that his attorneys were chosen for him by others, including “Raulston Schoolfield, the ousted criminal judge who had interceded on my behalf by asking attorney Robert Hill to represent me.” [34] Although Ray does not say this, Schoolfield was ousted from office after it was shown he had been bribed to dismiss charges against a corrupt Teamster official in Hoffa’s camp. [35]

Ralston Schoolfield is not mentioned by John Larry Ray, yet this curious aside from James corroborates John Larry’s suggestive (and I believe important) observation:

Persons around Jimmy Hoffa figure into James’s case more than once. Jimmy Hoffa’s lawyer, Z.T. Osborn, would end up “committing suicide” after he agreed to represent my brother James. [36] How did James make Osborn’s acquaintance, and who would send my brother Jerry to ask for Osborn’s assistance? It was none other than St. Louis Steamfitters Local Union #562 boss Larry Callanan, right-hand man to [St. Louis crime figure Frank] Buster Wortman [close to Hoffa’s attorney Morris Shenker, “one of the Mob’s leading lawyers in the U.S.”]. [37]

James Earl Ray himself suggested to an HSCA investigator in 1977 that they look into all of these figures (apart from Wortman). [38]

James Earl Ray’s testimony and book hinted that his case had become intertwined in a complex fashion with the pressures being brought in 1967-71 on Edward Grady Partin, Attorney General Robert Kennedy’s chief witness in the conviction of James Hoffa for jury tampering. [39] In two books I have made the same suggestion about both the JFK case and more particularly the Garrison investigation of it. Walter Sheridan’s labyrinthine narrative of Hoffa’s efforts to overturn his conviction (The Fall and Rise of Jimmy Hoffa) is once again, as in the JFK case, the best reference work for understanding the relevance of figures in Ray’s background like Ralston Schoolfield, Z.T. Osborn, and (a name I shall refer to shortly) Joseph Oster.

The role of both Ray and Sirhan in facilitating their own convictions is striking. In the case of Sirhan it can be attributed to his apparent openness to hypnotic suggestion, both before and after his arrest. But similar questions have now been raised about James Earl Ray, by his brother John. [40]

Relevant Allegations of Hypnosis from Unreliable Narrators

Indeed, given the general agreement that Sirhan Sirhan was somehow programmed or hypnotized to become a “Manchurian candidate,” it is arresting that both Oswald and Ray also had men in their background alleged to be interested in hypnosis. One cannot discuss this feature without noting that the men making these allegations were notoriously unreliable narrators. Indeed one must note that in this milieu, on the fringes of both intelligence and the underworld, one is forced to deal with a multitude of witnesses – such as Gerry Patrick Hemming in the case of Oswald – who unquestionably were both part of the larger scene and notoriously unreliable in their accounts of what happened. [41]

David Ferrie, who had known Oswald when the latter was a teenager in the Civil Air Patrol, had studied hypnosis and practiced it on youths whom he knew. [42] Ferrie, an eccentric, was also said to be “a bishop of the Orthodox Old Catholic Church of North America.” [43] (Dr. William J. Bryan, who is some researchers’ candidate to have been the man who hypnotized Sirhan, was also an ordained priest in the Old Roman Catholic Church.) [44]

The truth about Ferrie is unfortunately occluded by clouds of unreliable narration. The same is even more true of his alleged friend, Jules Rocco Kimble, a man who first talked to New Orleans DA Jim Garrison about Ferrie and then was suspected of having been “Raoul,” the supposed handler who gave directions to James Earl Ray. However a professional Canadian reporter by the name of Andy Salwyn found witnesses who placed Kimble in Montreal in the summer of 1967, at the same time as Ray, and he provided this information in a detailed report to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP).

Thanks to the Mary Ferrell Foundation, we can now read this RCMP report online. [45] In it, we find the following words attributed to Kimble’s Montreal girlfriend, Marcelle Mathieu:

He also told me that he would hypnotize people and that he helped a doctor curing people with it. I told him not to try it on me. He told me that he was studying psychology at McGill University, but I found out this wasn’t true either. [46]

As is pointed out in Truth at Last, a book by Ray’s brother John Larry Ray, Kimble could have been referring to the CIA-assisted mind-control experimentation of Dr. Ewen Cameron at the Allan Memorial Institute behind McGill University. [47] The existence of this experimentation was still a closely guarded secret in 1967. John Larry Ray links this Kimble interest in hypnosis to James Ear Ray’s undoubted and repeated visits to two hypnotists in Los Angeles, Mark Freeman and Xavier von Koss. [48]

The House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) said Kimble was not in Montreal at the same time as Ray. To claim this, they ignored Salwyn’s report (that it was “during the Summer of 1967”) and relied instead on conflicting testimony from the dubious private eye Joseph Oster (Kimble “apparently did not visit Montreal until after Ray had left there in August 1967”). [49] When a government tribunal simply suppresses a claim because it conflicts with a second and more dubious one, our interest in the original claim should be strengthened. And in this case it appears that Salwyn was correct: an FBI report on Kimble seems to indicate that Kimble was already in Montreal by July 1967 (“at a Klan meeting on July eighteenth, sixtyseven, it was indicated that ███ [space for a six-letter name] fled state of Louisiana allegedly to Montreal, Canada.”) [50]

Why do I say Oster was dubious? Because he had been part of the extensive effort to prevent Jimmy Hoffa from going to jail, by harassing Ed Partin, Robert Kennedy’s chief witness against Hoffa. [51] Oster had in fact personally arrested Partin on one occasion, on the basis of a complaint from a witness (Irby Aucoin) who also figured in the Garrison investigation. [52] Oster, in short, was not at arm’s length from the intelligence-mob realm which Kimble inhabited. In addition, Oster was a former partner of Guy Banister, suspected of controlling Oswald’s pro-Castro leafleting in 1963. Oster’s later partner was Milton Kaack, the former FBI Agent who in 1963 wrote a pre-assassination report on Lee Harvey Oswald, based on an interview which Oswald himself requested. [53]

I have a personal reason for my interest in CIA links to Manchurian candidates and assassinations. Some of you may recall the Symbionese Liberation Army (S.L.A.) in the 1970s, the group led by “Cinque” or Donald DeFreeze. The S.L.A. first made headlines by murdering the superintendent of the Oakland School District, Marcus Foster; it subsequently kidnapped Patty Hearst and is said to have brainwashed her. [54] As a convict, Cinque had participated in a behavior modification program in the California Medical Facility at Vacaville state prison; and that program’s director, Colton Westbrook, subsequently applied to teach in my Department of English at UC Berkeley. The chairman asked me to peruse Westbrook’s curriculum vitae; and I immediately noticed that while in Vietnam Westbrook had worked as a civilian employee of Pacific Architects & Engineers (PA&E). PA&E was a well-known cover for the CIA in Saigon, and I so notified the Chairman. [55] Westbrook did not get the job.

Because of this experience I have noticed other veterans of behavior modification programs who became assassins. These include Mark David Chapman, the assassin of John Lennon, and Dennis Sweeney, the assassin of Allard Lowenstein (the only former Congressman ever to become involved in the topic of assassinations). Chapman had been treated at Castle Memorial Hospital for clinical depression; Sweeney had spent eight years in the Mid-Hudson Psychiatric Center, New York’s maximum security psychiatric hospital.

General Features of the Three Major Assassinations

Let us move now to an overview of these three assassinations. At first they were all quickly traced to mob figures, as David Scheim summarized a quarter century ago in his book Contract on America. [56] More recently they have been traced to US intelligence agencies, particularly the CIA.

In his new edition of Oswald and the CIA, John Newman writes that “someone in CIA counterintelligence…was harnessed to the [JFK] plot;” and he concludes that “we must now seriously consider the possibility that [James] Angleton was probably their general manager.” [57] In the case of MLK, Philip Melanson wrote that “the trail of conspiracy leads to elements of the U.S. intelligence community.” [58] In his new book, Who Killed Bobby?, Shane O’Sullivan devotes an entire chapter to the “intelligence connections” of the RFK case, and another to his thesis that Sirhan was a “Manchurian candidate,” a “programmed assassin” of the type the CIA sought to develop in its program MK/ULTRA. [59] O’Sullivan adds that Angleton and J. Edgar Hoover “held photographs of Robert Kennedy’s autopsy in their personal safes.” [60]

The three major U.S. assassinations of the 1960s also have drug-trafficking in their background. In Deep Politics I wrote about how Jack Ruby was identified in 1956 as the man in Dallas who gave the “okay” for a “large narcotics setup operating between Mexico, Texas, and the East.” [61]

James Earl Ray was said by some associates to have been interested in the sale of narcotics, while his traveling companion Charles Stein also had a narcotics background. [62] (John Larry Ray writes that in 1967 James and Stein were involved together in a marijuana delivery from Mexico.) [63] In addition, William Pepper has collected testimony from witnesses that the second gunman in the Martin Luther King assassination was hired and directed by a Mafia-connected produce dealer named Frank Liberto, now deceased. A confessed participant in the plot, Loyd Jowers, has said that his friend Liberto “was into a variety of illegal activities, including gunrunning, drugs, prostitution, and gambling” (emphasis added). [64]

In the case of RFK, Warren Hinckle and William Turner, in Deadly Secrets, suggested that Sirhan Sirhan “was a hired gun.” Their chief evidence is the references in his extraordinary cryptic notebook to payments from a “Frank Donaruma,” a convict dealing with race horses who (in their words) “had a rap sheet showing arrests in New York and Miami.” [65] In the actual LA Police Department records on the Sirhan case there is one page on Frank Donneroummas, saying: “Security check with a MUS Carpender through the Calif. Racing Assoc. shows that the subject has prior narcotic and petty larceny arrests in New York” (emphasis added). [66]

Aginter Press, the King and Letelier Assassinations, and Operation Condor

There are both intelligence and global drug connection aspects to James Earl Ray’s ten-day visit to Lisbon in May 1968, shortly before his arrest. According to the HSCA, Ray “thought that he might be able to make contact with a white mercenary military group in the Portuguese capital, because of the colonial presence of Portugal in Angola.” [67] Ray’s interest in becoming a mercenary seems to have been ongoing: back in December he had written to inquire about emigrating to Rhodesia, and on June 10 he was arrested as he was about to board a plane to Brussels; clearly he was aware that South Africa, Lisbon, and Brussels were the main points of contact for white mercenary activity in Africa.

To the best of my knowledge, there was just one mercenary group in Lisbon, Aginter Press, created in 1966, two years before Ray apparently contacted it. Aginter Press was a highly secret group which, according to an official Italian Senate Report, was “directly linked to the CIA and the Portuguese secret service, that specialized in provocative operations.” [68] Years ago I wrote about Aginter Press as part of a global “CIA-Mafia-Narcotics Connection” financed in large part by international drug trafficking. [69]

A few words about Aginter and one of its so-called “correspondents,” the celebrated Italian assassin Stefano delle Chiaie, will illustrate about the importance of the global drug connection. Aginter supplied foot soldiers for the CIA’s operations in Chile between 1970 and 1975, first in Patria y Libertad which prepared for the 1973 coup, and later with DINA, Pinochet’s drug-financed intelligence agency. [70]

(A principal player in Patria y Libertad was Michael Townley, the leading architect of the Orlando Letelier assassination in Washington, who is also accused of involvement with the CIA murderers of Chile’s General Schneider in 1970. Some see in the Schneider murder a possible connection to JFK’s. To this day, Townley is thought of in America as a DINA agent, but in Latin America as a CIA agent. [71] I suspect he was both.)

Stefano delle Chiaie — alias Alfa — became a principal assassin for DINA, attacking, for example, a prominent Chilean Christian Democrat, Bernardo Leighton, in Rome. In 1982 he traveled to Miami with a leading Turkish drug trafficker, Abdullah Çatli, who was simultaneously a killer for the Turkish deep state and a veteran of the CIA’s Gladio network in Turkey. [72] The drug traffic through Turkey in which Çatli was prominent has been linked by researchers to a drug route from Afghanistan which at every stage was controlled by members or allies of Al Qaeda. [73]

Aginter Press had been founded in September 1966, less than two years prior to Ray’s visit, by veterans of the French Secret Army Organization (OAS) – an anti-de Gaulle faction that enjoyed contacts with Angleton in the CIA. By 1968 Aginter was dispatching mercenaries to many parts of the world. Specifically, they were sent to Guatemala, which in 1968 was in the midst of a massive CIA-assisted terror campaign, in which former CIA Cubans and U.S. Green Berets were also involved. (Some 50,000 people are estimated to have been killed by 1971.) [74] One of these Aginter operatives, an American by the name of Jay Sablonsky (or Salby), reached Guatemala in 1968 on a false Guatemalan passport, issued by Guatemala’s Montreal consulate. [75]

Montreal was thus a liaison point for Aginter, and this may explain Ray’s brief return there from Toronto in April or May of 1968. [76] Melanson located in Toronto the so-called “fat man” who on May 2, 1968 — six days before Ray’s arrival in Lisbon — delivered a package to Ray in Toronto addressed to Ray’s alias of Ramon Sneyd. The “fat man” (to whom Melanson gave the pseudonym of William Bolton) [77] told Melanson that the package was a letter “about a job in Portugal and it showed that he had help.” Bolton further “asserted that there was `big money’ behind Ray.” [78] (Melanson was the first person to interview Bolton, who expressed fear during the interview: “within several weeks of my surprise confrontation with him, he precipitously left his job and his residence in eastern Canada.”) [79]

The CIA was conducting surveillance on Martin Luther King, and its copious King records treated King as a dangerous domestic threats to U.S. national security. [80]One interview in 1965 reported the belief of a redacted informant (probably Roy Wilkins) that

somehow or other Martin Luther KING must be removed from the leadership of the Negro movement….████ feels that unless the Negro leaders, other than KING, are informed and are capable of intelligent maneuvering, the Communists or Negro elements who will be directed by the Communists may be in a position to, if not take over the Negro movement, completely disrupt it and hence cause extremely critical problems for the Government of the United States. [81]

There has been much recent attention paid to Marrell McCollough, a companion of Martin Luther King who was on the balcony where and when King was shot. By all accounts McCollough was an undercover agent for the Memphis Police Department with a military background, who later went to work for the CIA. [82] William Pepper collected testimony from Loyd Jowers that he had been part of the plot to murder King; and that McCollough (who has admitted he knew Jowers) was a co-conspirator in the murder plot. [83]

Lieutenant Manuel Pena and Sergeant Enrique “Hank” Hernandez, the two veterans of the Los Angeles Police Force who had the most day-to-day control of the RFK assassination investigation, both had CIA connections through their training for and participation in police operations in Latin America. Pena had reportedly left the LAPD for a “special training unit” at CIA’s Camp Peary base in Virginia. [84]

Pena “also built up strong connections with Interpol: a senior official in the Mexican government was his `number one connection into Latin America,’ and he’d make frequent trips down there.” [85] Both Oswald and Ray are said to have visited Mexico prior to the events for which they were arrested, and in both cases after the preparations for implicating them had clearly begun. Senior Mexican officials, notably the future Mexican Minister of Government Fernando Gutiérrez Barrios, also falsified records at the behest of the CIA in the case of Lee Harvey Oswald. [86] His agency, the Mexican Federal Security Directorate (DFS), had been involved throughout its three decades of existence in drug trafficking. [87]

The CIA also had a representative in the interrogation of Oswald. This was Harry D. Holmes, who was in the final Oswald interview, and may have choreographed the length of it so that Oswald and Ruby would meet in the DPD basement. Holmes was a Postal Inspector, but Postal Inspectors in cities with the CIA’s mail-opening program (HT/LINGUAL) had CIA clearances; indeed, Postal Inspectors were in charge of HT/LINGUAL. [88]

A New Analysis of the King Assassination, Based on Two Other Deep Events

I wish now to propose a new hypothesis about the MLK case which is based on a striking similarity between it, JFK, and 9/11. I am talking about the prior designation of a culprit whose name or names existed in intelligence files, and could be counted on to embarrass a wide spectrum of the US Government into cover-up of the deep event for which he was blamed. The name I am talking about in the MLK case, however, is not that of James Earl Ray, but of his alias, Eric S. Galt.

Let me begin with a word or two about the dubious detective work on JFK and 9/11. Less than fifteen minutes after President Kennedy’s assassination, the height and weight of Kennedy’s alleged killer was posted. [89] Before the last of the hijacked planes crashed on 9/11, the FBI told Richard Clarke that they had a list of alleged hijackers. [90] In both events, there are reasons to suspect that the information about the alleged suspects came from prior information in intelligence files.

In the case of Oswald, within 15 minutes of the assassination and long before Oswald was picked up in the Texas Theater, Inspector Sawyer of the Dallas police put out on the police radio network, and possibly other networks, a description of the killer – “About 30, 5’10”, 165 pounds.” [91] This height and weight exactly matched the measurements attributed to Lee Harvey Oswald in Oswald’s FBI file, and also in CIA documents about him. [92]

The announced weight was, however, significantly different from Oswald’s actual weight, 131 pounds, as recorded by the Dallas police after his arrest. [93] More importantly, there is no credible source for the posted measurements from any witness in Dallas. (The witness said to have spotted him, Howard Brennan, failed to identify Oswald in a line-up.) [94]

I conclude that the measurements were taken from existing files on Oswald, rather than from any observations in Dallas on November 22. If so, someone with access to those files may have already designated Oswald as the culprit, before there was any evidence to connect him to the crime. If not, how could the determination have been made within fifteen minutes?

A similar situation pertains to the alleged hijackers on 9/11. For example, shortly afterwards men in Saudi Arabia complained that “the hijackers’ `personal details’” released by the FBI — “including name, place, date of birth and occupation — matched their own.” [95] One of them, Saeed al-Ghamdi, claimed further that an alleged photograph shown on CNN (of an alleged Flight 93 hijacker with the same name) was in fact a photograph of himself. He speculated “that CNN had probably got the picture from the Flight Safety flying school he attended in Florida.” [96]

If the above information is accurate, then the details posted by the FBI and CNN about the alleged hijackers cannot have derived from the events of 9/11, with which the survivors in Saudi Arabia would appear to have been uninvolved. Once again this leaves the strong possibility that the details were taken from existing files, rather than from empirical observations on September 11. [97]

Some of the hijackers, like Lee Harvey Oswald, may have been in CIA files for a special reason: because the CIA had an operational interest in them. I wish to suggest that in an analogous way U.S. security files also contained information on another person of interest to them: the man whose identity was assumed by Ray, Eric S. Galt.

Internal CIA Evidence of Operational Interest in Oswald and the Hijackers

Let me now discuss evidence, from internal CIA records, about an operational CIA interest in first Oswald and later two of the alleged al-Qaeda hijackers, Nawaz al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar. In 2001, as in 1963, the CIA withheld information about these people from the FBI, which ought categorically to have received it. The anomalies are extreme.

This is now easy to show in the case of Oswald. On October 10, 1963, six weeks before the assassination of John F. Kennedy, CIA Headquarters sent out two messages about Oswald, a teletype to the FBI, State, and Navy, and a cable to the chief of the CIA’s Mexico City station. Both messages contained false and mutually contradictory statements, and also withheld known facts of great potential importance. [98] The teletype to the FBI withheld the obviously significant information that Oswald had reportedly met in Mexico City with a Soviet Vice-Consul, Valeriy Kostikov, who was believed by CIA officers to be an officer of the KGB, perhaps even a specialist in assassinations. [99]

CIA officer Jane Roman helped draft both messages. In 1995 she was confronted by two interviewers with irrefutable evidence that she had signed off on erroneous information about Oswald in the CIA cable to Mexico City. After much questioning, she finally admitted, “I’m signing off on something I know isn’t true.” One of the interviewers, John Newman, then asked her, “‘Is this indicative of some sort of operational interest in Oswald’s file?’ ‘Yes,’ Roman replied. ‘To me it’s indicative of a keen interest in Oswald held very closely on the need-to-know basis.’” She later repeated, “I would think there was definitely some operational reason to withhold it [the information at CIA headquarters on Oswald], if it was not sheer administrative error, when you see all the people who signed off on it.” [100]

Other CIA officers withheld important information from the FBI in January 2000, with respect to Khalid al-Mihdhar, who would later be identified as one of the al-Qaeda hijackers on September 11, 2001. The National Security Agency (NSA) overheard, on a Yemeni telephone conversation, information about a meeting in Malaysia which al-Mihdhar would attend, along with Tewfiq bin Attash, the mastermind of the fatal attack on the USS Cole. [101] It notified the CIA but not the FBI. Meanwhile,

CIA leaders were so convinced about the potential significance of the al Qaeda meeting in Malaysia, they not only set up surveillance of it, but provided regular updates to the FBI director [Louis Freeh], the head of the CIA [George Tenet], and the national security advisor [Samuel Berger]. [102]

Once again, however, the regular FBI (as opposed to its director Louis Freeh) was not notified.

[Khalid al-Mihdhar’s] Saudi passport – which contained a visa for travel to the United States – was photocopied [in Qatar] and forwarded to CIA headquarters. The information was not shared with FBI headquarters until August 2001. An FBI agent detailed to the Bin Laden unit at the CIA attempted to share this information with colleagues at FBI Headquarters. A CIA desk officer instructed him not to send the cable with this information. Several hours later, this same desk officer drafted a cable distributed solely within CIA alleging that the visa documents had been shared with the FBI. [103]

Lawrence Wright, reviewing this and other significant anomalies, reported in The Looming Tower the belief among FBI agents following bin Laden “that the agency was protecting Mihdhar and [his companion, the alleged 9/11 hijacker Nawaz al-] Hazmi because it hoped to recruit them,” or alternatively that “the CIA was running a joint venture with Saudi intelligence” using al-Mihdhar and al-Hazmi. [104] Wright himself speculated in a companion essay he wrote for The New Yorker that “The CIA may also have been protecting an overseas operation and was afraid that the F.B.I. would expose it.” [105]

The CIA’s concealing of information from the FBI about Oswald and the hijackers was necessary for the designated culprits to play their allotted roles in the deep events. In both cases the FBI later complained that the withholding of information was crucial in enabling the deep events to occur. [106] It would be wrong to assume that the withholding of information, though deliberate, had the assassination and plane hijackings in mind. It is perhaps more likely that Oswald and al-Mihdhar were being protected by the CIA for some other operation – possibly against Cuba (in the case of Oswald), or to penetrate existing al-Qaeda cells in the US (in the case of al-Hamzi and al-Mihdhar).

But someone in the CIA with knowledge of these sensitive files, and intent on a criminal deep event, could have used the sensitive identities of Oswald and al-Mihdhar as designated culprits in the plots, knowing that the CIA would be virtually coerced into cover-up because of the embarrassing manipulations of their files on these individuals.

How (and Perhaps Why) the Arrest of James Earl Ray Was Delayed

In a different way, I believe that the U.S. Government was embarrassed into cover-up again in the case of James Earl Ray in the MLK assassination. In saying this, I am not assuming that Ray himself had been of interest to the CIA, in the same way as Oswald and al-Mihdhar. [107] But Eric S. Galt, the real man whose name was assumed early on by Ray as an alias, was an intelligence insider who was certainly the subject of a sensitive file. A sensitive file must have existed also for the Toronto policeman Ramon George Sneyd, whose name supplied a later Ray alias.

For these reasons I conclude that the MLK plot was structured to provoke governmental embarrassment by the skilled and knowledgeable selection of Ray’s aliases, both before and after King’s death. This would put someone inside intelligence, rather than the mob, at the center of the MLK plot.

It has long been recognized that the selection of Eric S. Galt as an alias for Ray could not have been made by Ray himself, but was a sophisticated choice by someone controlling Ray, of a man who was

1) roughly similar to Ray in physical characteristics, and even more similar after Ray underwent plastic surgery in 1967. [108]
2) part of the national security establishment, because of the classified work he was doing for Union Carbide, both in Canada and the US, on proximity fuses.

As Philip Melanson pointed out, the real Galt “was the subject of a very detailed dossier. Whoever had access to it had all the information needed to use Galt’s identity as a cover, to match Galt to Ray.” [109]

A search for Eric S. Galt began on April 9 but increased on April 11, with the discovery of an abandoned white Mustang, thought to be the murderer’s escape vehicle, which had been purchased under that name. [110] But from the beginning, and even as late as the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) investigation a decade later, the awkwardness created by the name prevented its public use. “In fact, Ray’s Alabama license, car registration, signature at the New Rebel Motel in Memphis, and assorted forms, letters, and coupons were all `Eric S. Galt.’” [111] But press reports about the search for the assassin used instead the name of someone who did not exist, “Eric Starvo Galt.” [112]

The official account of how the real Galt was discovered and linked to the MLK case is that on April 18, 1968, only hours before the FBI would finally identify James Earl Ray as the real suspect, the Kansas City field office of the FBI notified Headquarters and the Memphis FBI that “Review of March, nineteen sixty-eight Toronto, Ontario, Canada telephone directory reveals a listing for one Eric Galt.” [113] With this dubious timing, the real Eric Galt was thus spared being an active suspect. (In a similar delay, the FBI only advised its field offices of the Toronto policeman Ramon George Sneyd on June 6, 1968, two days before Ray’s arrest in London.) [114]

In the first edition of his MLK book, Melanson believed this unlikely story, writing that “What apparently saved the real Galt from being targeted as the prime suspect was the slothfulness of law enforcement.” [115] I believe on the contrary that it was the sensitivity of the Galt name, rather than slothfulness, that led to its remaining concealed until just before Ray would be proclaimed as the suspect.

Apparently, this same sensitivity induced even the HSCA in its Report to misrepresent the aliases used by Ray. It reported in 1978 that “When he rented an apartment or a room, bought a car, secured a driver’s license…he did so as Eric Starvo Galt.” (rather than “Eric S. Galt”). [116] In like manner the HSCA misrepresented the name in Ray’s passport (“Ramon George Sneyd”) as “George Ramon Sneyd.” [117]

In his revised edition of his book, Melanson recognized for the first time that the real Galt’s employment, in a security-cleared position at Union Carbide in the shadow of some of the United States’ most secretive weapons research, meant that information about him “might [Melanson’s word] have been accessible through federal computer searches.” [118]

“Might” is far too weak a word; Galt’s name would have been instantly available, I believe without a doubt. 1968 was a year of intense anti-war and civil rights disturbances, of massive surveillance of Americans by Army Intelligence, by the CIA through Operation Chaos, by the FBI, and even by the NSA. As Senator Sam Ervin later revealed in a set of Senate Hearings, by this time computerized files on civilians were being amassed and shared by all these agencies.

It is inconceivable to me that the name of Eric Galt had not turned up in a computer search almost immediately, whether from his security file, or from some other file such as an INS file, because of Galt’s frequent crossing of the US-Canadian border. [119] (One has to keep in mind that the FBI had no trouble locating and interviewing all kinds of unrelated Lowmeyers in America, in the wake of Ray’s use of “Harvey Lowmeyer” as an alias, a name taken from that of a low-level criminal who had worked in a prison kitchen with Ray’s brother, John.) [120]

I draw two conclusions from my assertion that that some branches of the US government knew early of the real Galt problem. The first is the delay in identifying Galt was not from slothfulness; the real Galt’s existence was covered up to protect both Galt and the national security establishment from embarrassment. (In The Road to 9/11 I point to a similar cover-up to protect Ali Mohamed, a US-al Qaeda double agent who was the trainer of those who bombed the World Trade Center in 1993.) >[121] The second, more disturbing conclusion is that those plotting the MLK assassination were intelligence insiders: people who knew of Galt’s sensitive situation, and exploited it in such a way as to ensure that the government would be embarrassed into covering up what really happened on those days.

This is a conclusion supported less by the specific evidence in the MLK case than on what are to me the striking analogies between it, the JFK and 9/11 cases – namely, the selection from information on file of a sensitive identity as culprit, which would first impede investigation and later guarantee a cover-up.

This conclusion would suggest an intelligence component to the MLK assassination at a much higher level than previously noted facts that the CIA was collaborating with local police forces like that of Memphis, or that the CIA had Martin Luther King under surveillance. It also strengthens my strong suspicion that all of our major deep events, including JFK, MLK, and now 9/11, derive in large part from a common source.

On the surface, these conclusions seem to point out a difference between the MLK case and the two Kennedy assassinations. In JFK and RFK, the designated culprits, Oswald and Sirhan, were apprehended almost immediately. The use of sensitive names, Galt and Sneyd, served in contrast to delay the apprehension of James Earl Ray for weeks. If Ray was also a designated culprit, why would he be protected in this fashion?

I can think of only one reason. June 6, 1968, the day that the FBI launched an all-points search for “Ramon George Sneyd,” was also the day on which Robert Kennedy died of his wounds. Ray was then arrested two days later, appeasing the growing apprehension among some that assassins were now, with impunity, determining the future of America.

Philip Melanson has rightly drawn attention to the effective help provided Ray in the weeks prior to his arrival in London, contrasted with the breakdown in that help thereafter. His explanation for this breakdown is that “Ray had lost his lifeline and was desperate…the unseen hand was gone.” Add he adds,

The question arises as to how a sophisticated assassination conspiracy clever enough to match Ray and Galt, kill King, and guide Ray through Toronto could be inept enough to allow him to be captured alive in London. [122]

Melanson’s answer to his question is that “It is only in James Bond novels that operations always go smoothly.” [123]

The alternative answer, to which I have come only recently, is that there was no ineptitude: Ray was meant to be captured, but only at such time as this apparent feat of justice would counter the atrocity of Robert Kennedy’s murder. In this way Ray’s capture served to offset the popular anger and frustration which produced such violent days of rioting after the murder of Martin Luther King.

As I say, this is the only reason I can think of for a planned delay in the arrest of Ray as designated culprit. But of course this reason, if correct, would be still another corroboration of a single source behind the twin deep events of April 4 and June 5, 1968.


[1] In writing this paper I have been helped immeasurably by the Mary Ferrell Foundation website, http://www.maryferrell.org. This comparative approach is now made much easier by the addition of MLK and RFK files to the existing JFK collection. As there is far more research to be done, I am hoping that some younger resercher will take advantage of this new opportunity.

[2] Peter Dale Scott, Deep Politics and the Death of JFK (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998), 259, 260.

[3] Peter Dale Scott, The War Conspiracy: JFK, 9/11, and the Deep Politics of War (Ipswich, MA: Mary Ferrell Foundation Press, 2008), 350-51.

[4] Peter Dale Scott, “Deep Events and the CIA’s Global Drug Connection,” Global Research, September 19, 2008, http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=SCO20080906&articleId=10095.

[5] New York Times, November 29, 1963; 20 WH 27-29; 22 WH 544.

[6] Scott, Deep Politics, 268-70, 284.

[9] LAPD Microfilm, Volume 60, p. 341; cf. O’Sullivan, Who Killed Bobby, 215-16.

[11] Robert Houghton, Special Unit Senator (New York: Random House, 1970), 114. This version of what Buckner said in the authorized official account of RFK’s murder is quite different from the LAPD report of Buckner’s statement: that on June 4 he sold Sirhan “some .22-caliber hollow points, however he is not sure of the brand” (LAPD Microfilm, Volume 108, p. 107).

[12] John Hunt, “Robert Kennedy’s Headwounds, Part 1: The Case for Conspiracy,” JFK Lancer Productions & Publications: http://www.jfklancer.com.

[13] Scott, Deep Politics, 284, 291; 26 WH 370-72, 10 WH 375.

[14] O’Sullivan, Who Killed Bobby?, 108. Cf. LAPD Microfilm, Volume 86, pp. 605-06.

[15] Charles Camplen and James F. Dale, Great Southwest Warehouse, 26 WH 371-72.

[16] Scott, Deep Politics, 283-91.

[18] O’Sullivan, Who Killed Bobby?, 108, 217.

[19] Interviewed by the Warren Commission, Abt testified that he was besieged by”press, radio, and TV reporters” on November 23, but that he was never approached by Oswald, or anyone representing him (10 WH 116).

[20] Arthur J. Hanes, Sr.,a supporter of George Wallace, had defended three Ku Klux Klansmen accused of murdering Viola Liuzzo, after her participation in a civil rights march in Selma. J.B. Stoner, a founder of the National States Rights Party. was a suspect in many bombings, and was “under indictment in 1978 for the 1958 bombing of a Birmingham church” (HSCA, Report, 381).

[21] 24 WH 810 ABC News, WFAA, Fort Worth, Nov. 23, 1963.

[22] Timothy Cwiek, “John J. Abt: Did Oswald Ask For Him?,” The Third Decade, Volume 3, Issue 1, 1.

[23] James Earl Ray, Who Killed Martin Luther King? The True Story by the Alleged Assassin (New York: Marlowe & Co), 107: “From Wandsworth I wrote letters asking two well-known attorneys – F. Lee Bailey ofBoston and Arthur J. Hanes, Sr. of Birmingham, the only two prominent lawyers for whom I could remember a city and state location – if they would consider representing me when I returned to the United States.”

[24] Ray, Who Killed Martin Luther King? 138; John Larry Ray and Lyndon Barsten, Truth at Last: The Untold Story Behind James Earl Ray and the Assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. (Guilford, CN: Lyons Press, 2008), 147 (Wallace campaign).

[25] Melvin M. Belli and Allen P. Wilkinson, Everybody’s Guide to the Law (New York: HarperCollins, 2003), xlv (Cohen); Scott, Deep Politics and the Death of JFK, 233 (Barr).

[26] FBI 44-24016-1319; cited by A.J Weberman, http://ajweberman.com/nodules2/nodulec29.htm. Cf. William Pepper, An Act of State: The Execution of Martin Luther King (London: Verso,2003), 57.

[27] Seth Kantor, The Ruby Cover-Up (New York: Zebra Books, 1978), 290.

[28] Mark Lane and Dick Gregory, Murder in Memphis: The FBI and the Assassination of Martin Luther King (New York: Thunder’s Mouth Press, 1993), 208-10,

[29] Parsons agreed with the prosecution that there was no evidence of conspiracy in the case, and that Sirhan had acted alone. Likewise in his closing arguments Parsons ignored the conflicting evidence and spoke as if Sirhan’s guilt was unchallengeable (William Klaber and Philip Melanson, Shadow Play: The Murder of Robert F. Kennedy, the Trial of Sirhan Sirhan and the Failure of American Justice [New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1997], 137, 246-48).

[30] Kefauver Hearings, 10, 715 (Cohen, Meltzer), 888 (Sica); Peter Noyes, Legacy of Doubt (New York: Pinnacle Books, 1973), 238 (Sica). Cf. Scott, Deep Politics and the Death of JFK, 141-45 (Meltzer and Ruby associates).

[31] For example, Cooper stipulated that Sirhan had been at the rifle range as claimed by Marks and Starr, despite their dubious testimony. In general he assumed from the outset that Sirhan was the real and sole assassin of RFK, steadfastly refusing to look at the evidence that Sirhan was too far away to have fired the lethal shot: “a week into the case, he was alraady colluding with the prosecution and floating plea bargains” (O’Sullivan, Who Killed Bobby?, 109, 211, 212).

[32] O’Sullivan, Who Killed Bobby? 189-91. It was when he was facing conviction and deportation from the Friars Club case that Roselli went to Jack Anderson with his information about the CIA-mafia plots to kill Castro.

[33] Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 81, cf. 91.

[34] Ray, Who Killed Martin Luther King? 156.

[35] Walter Sheridan, The Fall and Rise of Jimmy Hoffa (New York: Saturday Review Press, 1972), 52, 104.

[36] John Larry Ray and Barsten draw attention to a number of questionable deaths in the MLK case, including those of Z.T. Osborn (p. 156), Judge Preston Battle (who they claim was about to grant James Earl Ray a new trial, p. 135), the journalists Bill Sartor and Louis Lomax (both researching the case, pp. 158-59), and the mob figure John Paul Spica (a former prison-mate of James Earl Ray called by the HSCA to testify, p. 79).

[37] Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 96; David E, Scheim, Contract on America: The Murders of John and Robert Kennedy (Silver Spring, MD: Argyle Press, 1983), 377 [Shenker]. John Larry Ray writes that in 1968 he tried to obtain the services of Shenker for his brother, and that it was Shenker who put him in touch with Percy Foreman (Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 127). Larry Callanan’s immunity from prosecution after generous donations to the Democratic Party was the subject of a scathing exposé in the Wall Street Journal, May 2, 1968; cf. Percival E. Jackson, Dissent in the Supreme Court (Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 1969), 462.

[39] Ray, Who Killed Martin Luther King? 154; HSCA MLK Appendix 10, 579; cf. Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 95-96.

[40] Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 22-26, 56-59, 85-86, 103-04, etc.

[41] For Hemming, see Scott, Deep Politics, 89, 91, etc.

[43] John S. Craig, “David Ferrie’s Web of Intrigue,” Dealey Plaza Echo, II, 3, p. 13; Henry Hurt, Reasonable Doubt (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1985), 263-64.

[44] O’Sullivan, Who Killed Bobby?, 398. Bryan had hypnotized the famous Boston Strangler, Albert DeSalvo, whose name appears inexplicably in Sirhan’s notebook of automatic writing, apparently written while he too was under hypnosis (O’Sullivan, Who Killed Bobby? 399-400).

[45] HSCA Administrative Folder U9, RCMP Report on Salwyn President John F. Kennedy — Murder of – Assistance to the F.B.I. NARA #124-10369-10060. Cf. Philip H. Melanson, The Martin Luther King Assassination: New Revelations on the Conspiracy and Cover-Up, 1968-1991 (New York: Shapolsky Publishers, 1991), 44-46.

[47] Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 85.

[48] HSCA, MLK, Appendix, Vol. XIII, p. 198; Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 100, 103-04.

[49] HSCA Report, 392, 663.

[51] Walter Sheridan, Fall and Rise of Jimmy Hoffa (New York: Saturday Review Press, 1972), 440-42; Peter Dale Scott, Crime and Cover-Up: The CIA, the Mafia, and the Dallas-Watergate Connection (Palo Alto, CA: Ramparts Press, 1977), 66.

[52] Sheridan, The Fall and Rise of Jimmy Hoffa, 442; cf. Scott, Crime and Cover-Up, 66.

[53] Scott, Deep Politics, 258, 357.

[54] Patty Hearst entered into the rhetoric and activities of her S.L.A. captors, and was ultimately convicted for her role in an S.L.A. bank robbery, despite the claim in her trial that she had been brainwashed.

[55] Today PA&E operates as a Private Military Company (PMC), with a $250 million contract to build infrastructure for the UN mission in Darfur.

[56] Scheim, Contract on America, 251-84. Scheim opens by showing how an earlier French book by Thomas Buchanan was systematically redacted in its English translation, Who Killed Kennedy? so as virtually to eliminate its Mafia explanation for the JFK assassination.

[57] John Newman, Oswald and the CIA: The Documented Truth About the Unknown Relationship Between the U.S. Government and the Alleged Killer of JFK (New York: Skyhorse Publishing, 2008), 614, 637.

[58] Melanson, Martin Luther King Assassination, 187.

[59] Shane O’Sullivan, Who Killed Bobby?: The Unsolved Murder of Robert F. Kennedy (New York: Union Square Press, 2008), 380-424.

[60] O’Sullivan, Who Killed Bobby? 424.

[61] Scott, Deep Politics, 131. This setup, which also ran from Mexico through Dallas to Montreal, is well described by Jean-Pierre Charbonneau in his book The Canadian Connection (Ottawa: Optimum, 1976).

[62] HSCA Report, MLK, Appendix, Volume XIII, pp. 269-70, 280-81.

[63] Ray and Barsten, 99.

[64] Pepper, Act of State, 93. Cf. Jim Douglass , “The Martin Luther King Conspiracy Exposed in Memphis,” Probe Magazine, Spring 2000, http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/MLKconExp.html.

[65] Hinckle and Turner, Deadly Secrets, 276.

[66] RFK LAPD Microfilm, Volume 59 (Interviews, I-1930 thru I-2101) Current Section: Rainistella, Henry Ronald aka Donneroummas, Frank; I-1931 RAINISTELLA, Henry Ronald AKA DONNEROUMMAS, Frank.

[68] Senato della Repubblica. Commissione parlamentare d’inchiesta sul terrorismo in Italia e sulle cause della mancata individuazione dei responsabili delle stragi: Il terrorismo, le stragi ed il contesto storico politico, Redatta dal presidente della Commissione, Senatore Giovanni Pellegrino, Rome 1995, pp.204, 241, quoted by Daniele Ganser, NATO’s Secret Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe (London: Frank Cass Publishers, 2005), p. 115.

[69] Transnationalised repression; parafascism and the U.S.,” Lobster, XII (1986).

[70] Peter Dale Scott, “Introduction,” in Henrik Krüger, trans. by Jerry Meldon, The Great Heroin Coup: Drugs, Intelligence, & International Fascism (Boston: South End Press, 1980), 10-11.

[71] Cf. e.g. “Michael Townley : Ex agente de la CIA relata la conspiración,” El Correo de la Diaspora Argentine, May 10, 2000, http://www.elcorreo.eu.org/esp/article.php3?id_article=4329.

[72] Ganser, NATO’s Secret Armies, 237-38.

[73] Loretta Napoleoni, Terror Incorporated: Tracing the Dollars Behind the Terror Networks (New York: Seven Stories Press, 2005), 90-97.

[74] In March 1968 Viron Vaky, a State Department official who had been the Number 2 official in the Embassy in Guatemala, wrote in a long memo of dissent that the ”indiscriminate” violence of the counterinsurgency tactics ”present a serious problem for the U.S. in terms of our image in Latin America and the credibility of what we say we stand for” (New York Times, March 7, 1999).

[75] Krüger, Great Heroin Coup, 218.

[77] The FBI’s Murkin file gives him the unlikely name of “Robert McDouldton.”

[78] Melanson, Martin Luther King Assassination, 60.

[79] Melanson, Martin Luther King Assassination, 170.

[80] Melanson, Martin Luther King Assassination, 127.

[81] CIA, Memorandum for the Record, 11 May 1965, Discussion with ███, NARA #1993.08.10.09:29:16:530060.

[82]Melanson, Martin Luther King Assassination, 76, 171; William F. Pepper, Orders to Kill: The Truth behind the Murder of Martin Luther King (New York: Carroll and Graf, 1995), 152; Gerald Posner, Killing the Dream: James Earl Ray and the Assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. (New York: Harvest Book/ Harcourt Brace, 1998), 290.

[83] Pepper, Act of State, 94.

[84] Shane O’Sullivan, Who Killed Bobby?: The Unsolved Murder of Robert F. Kennedy (New York: Union Square Press, 2008), 405-15.

[85] O’Sullivan, Who Killed Bobby?, 407.

[86] Scott, Deep Politics II, 117, 120. The DFS account of its interview on November 23, 1963, of Silvia Durán, an employee of the Cuban Consulate in Mexico City, went through four successive revisions, the result of which was to efface its first report that she claimed Oswald told her he was a Communist.

[87] Scott, Deep Politics II, 135-36.

[89] Transcript of Dallas Police Channel Two, 12:44 PM; cf. Channel One 12:45 PM, http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/dpdtapes/; Warren Report 5, 17 WH 397, 23 WH 916.

[90] Clarke, Against All Enemies, 13-14. The list of 19 names, accepted without question by the 9/11 Commission Report, was given by the FBI to the press on September 14, 2001 (Daily Telegraph, September 15, 2001, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/15/whunt15.xml).

[91] Transcript of Dallas Police Channel Two, 12:44 PM; cf. Channel One 12:45 PM, http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/dpdtapes/; Warren Report 5, 17 WH 397.

[92] E.g., Dallas FBI Report from John Fain, May 12, 1960, (description supplied by Marguerite Oswald); CIA HQ Cable DIR 74830 to Mexico City, 10 Oct 1963, NARA #104-10015-10048, reproduced in John Newman, Oswald and the CIA (New York: Carroll & Graf, 1995), 512 (“five feet ten inches, one hundred sixty five pounds”).17 WH 704, NARA #157-10006-10213 (“Height: 5’10” Weight: 165 lbs.” [inaccurate description supplied by Marguerite Oswald]); CIA HQ Cable DIR 74830 to Mexico City, 10 Oct 1963, NARA #104-10015-10048, reproduced in Newman, Oswald and the CIA, 512 (“five feet ten inches, one hundred sixty five pounds”).

[93] Fingerprint card dated “11-25-63,” 17 WH 308.

[94] Warren Report 5, 144; Sylvia Meagher, Accessories After the Fact (Mary Ferrell Foundation Press, 2006), 10-13, 78n. After seeing Oswald twice on television, Brennan picked out Oswald in a second lineup (Warren Report, 143).

[95] Daily Telegraph, September 23, 2001, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/23/widen23.xml. Cf. Guardian, September 21, 2001, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/sep/21/afghanistan.september112: “Abdulaziz Al-Omari has also come forward to say he was not on the flight from Boston that crashed into the north tower of the World Trade Centre. An electrical engineer who works in Saudi Arabia, Mr Al-Omari said he was a student in Denver during the mid-1990s, and that his passport and other papers were stolen in a burglary in the US five years ago. … `The name is my name and the birth date is the same as mine,’ he told Asharq al-Aswat, a London-based Arabic newspaper. `But I am not the one who bombed the World Trade Centre in New York.’”

[97] On October 4, 2001, the FBI issued a press release showing what appeared to be photos from surveillance videotape of two hijackers, Mohammed Atta and Abdulaziz Al-Omari, entering Portland Jetport on the morning of September 11, 2001 (FBI Press Release, October 4, 2001, http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel01/100401picts.htm). If valid, these would constitute evidence from the event itself. However, the photos are anomalous, in that they show two superimposed time stamps, one showing 5:45, the other showing 5:53. The photos are not cited as evidence in the 9/11 Commission Report. On July 22, 2004, the date of the release of the 9/11 Commission Report, CNN aired what they said was surveillance videotape of two hijackers, Majed Moqed and Khalid al-Mihdhar. entering “at one of the security screening points at Dulles International” (CNN, http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0407/22/lad.04.html). The authenticity of the videotape has been challenged, however, because it lacks the time and date and location identification normally burned into a surveillance video image (Rowland Morgan and Ian Henshall, 9/11 Revealed: The Unanswered Questions [New York: Carroll and Graf, 2005], 117-19).

[98] I have argued that the conflicting messages were part of a so-called “marked card” or “barium meal” test to determine if and where leaks of sensitive information were occurring. This was a familiar technique, and was the responsibility of the CI/SIG or Counterintelligence Special Intelligence Group which drafted the two cables. See Scott, Deep Politics II, 17-18, 92; also Peter Dale Scott, “Oswald and the Hunt for Popov’s Mole,” The Fourth Decade, III, 3 (March 1996), 3;www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId=519798.

[99] Peter Dale Scott, Deep Politics II, 30-33.

[100] Jefferson Morley, Our Man in Mexico: Winston Scott and the Hidden History of the CIA (Lawrence, KA: University Press of Kansas, 2008), 196-98. See Peter Dale Scott, Deep Politics II, 30-33.

[101] Lawrence Wright, The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11 (New York: Knopf, 2006), 310.

[102] Amy B. Zegart, Flying Blind: The CIA, the FBI, and the Origins of 9/11 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 2007), 117.

[103] 9/11 Commission Report, 502n44.

[104] Wright, Looming Tower, 312, 313.

[105] Lawrence Wright, “The Agent,” New Yorker, July 10 and 17, 2006, 68.

[106] Clarence M. Kelley, Kelley: The Story of an FBI Director (Kansas City: Andrews, McMeel, & Parker, 1987), 268; James Bamford, A Pretext for War: 9/11, Iraq, and the Abuse of America’s Intelligence Agencies (New York: Doubleday, 2004), 224.

[107] This claim is made by John Ray and Lyndon Barsten in Truth at Last.

[108] Melanson, Martin Luther King Assassination, 135.

[109] Melanson, Martin Luther King Assassination, 32.

[110] Melanson, Martin Luther King Assassination, 137; HSCA MLK Report, Volume V, p. 347.

[111] Melanson, Martin Luther King Assassination, 36.

[112] Melanson, Martin Luther King Assassination, 36.

[113] Melanson, Martin Luther King Assassination, 138; FBI serial 44-38861-1448.

[114] FBI MURKIN File, Section 54, 35, cf. 25; FBI serial 44-38861-4267, cf. –4264.

[115] Melanson, Martin Luther King Assassination, 137.

[117] HSCA Report, 449. The correct order is given in the Appendix, V, 18.

[118] Melanson, Martin Luther King Assassination, 168.

[119] My search for my own FBI HQ file in 1978 delivered, among other things, records of my border crossings in 1957 and 1958 to attend the UN General Assembly as a Canadian diplomat.

[120] Melanson, Martin Luther King Assassination, 7.

[121] Scott, Road to 9/11, 151-60.

[122] Melanson, Martin Luther King Assassination, 143-44.

[123] Melanson, Martin Luther King Assassination, 144.

Read Full Post »

I looked into this a little. Clear evidence of media censoring – at least. This happening does not appear in mainstream media at all.

CNBC reported this. Within hours, CNBC senior VP Kevin Krim’s children were murdered. The CNBC page reporting on the lawsuit was subsequently and quickly removed, but at least one blogger caught screen shots of the CNBC article before it was removed. Appears they are also trying to make a professional hit appear as a suicide: Initial reports from the Wall Street Journal say the mother found the nanny unconscious on the bathroom floor. The next day, the new story is that the mother saw the nanny stabbing herself in the neck. Huh?

(This article was taken from this blog. Thanks!)

Saturday, October 27, 2012

CNBC article on 43 Trillion Lawsuit has been taken down just as I thought it would be. Link goes to an empty page now. CNBC Sr. V.P. digital executive two kids killed hours after being put on net.

Yesterday – CNBC page linked below
Today CNBC page linked below ( look at date and time published, they match to show it was the same page)

The article was taken down that I wrote about yesterday.  I got the screen shots of it on CNBC and so there is proof that it was there and a lawsuit was filed against the banksters and top government officials.

The original link to CNBC is here:  http://www.cnbc.com/id/49555671/  (you can still see the comments left from the article at the bottom of the page and that the article was about the lawsuit.  (Until they make the page a “404” error)

Here is my article about it with the screenshots:


What gives this more of a twist is the horrendous murder of two young children in NYC.  An anonymous/Alison left a comment on the above article, saying that the CNBC Sr. V.P. executive of digital (internet) had his children murdered the same day/hours after the article came out.

Here is the comment:

 Hi Sherrie,

Of course the following could just be a coincidence….

You might also find it interesting to note that the chief exec of CNBC digital Kevin Krim’s children were murdered (2 of them) on the VERY same day this article went live.
Supposidly their nanny killed them but I guess we’ll never know seeing as she apparently slit her own throat and wrists and is now in critical condition in hospital. I doubt very much she’ll make it!

Reads like an episode on Damages…


I found more articles about the murder of the children online.  Here is one from CNN that has been updated and proclaims the nanny stabbed herself when she heard the mother come in the apartment.
Is it all coincidence that it happened hours after CNBC put the 43 trillion lawsuit online?

 The children’s father, Kevin Krim, a senior vice president for CNBC Digital and former Yahoo executive, was en route back home from the West Coast. Police broke the news to him at John F. Kennedy International Airport.

I feel for the family.  I simply can’t imagine the most horrendous  nightmare of having your children murdered.

Now CNBC has taken down the article/information about the lawsuit, I figured that would happen and that is why I captured every bit of it on the CNBC website.   I captured it compared to reproducing for three reasons.

One:  It says “copyrighted” at the bottom
Two:  To show and prove it was on CNBC and not made up (which can appear to be when just copying material)
Three:  To have a record of it, when it disappeared off the net.

FYI:  It does seem they are erasing the whole page, now only 2 comments are left on the page.  There were many more comments yesterday about the lawsuit on CNBC.

I found that Marketwatch has the same information up about the lawsuit at this time.  Here is the screenshot of it on their page:

Question is:  How long will it stay up on Marketwatch and will something happen to an executive or their family there of a horrendous nature or accident?


  1. there is something very strange about the original internet post… it feels like a fake story on a fake web page, made to look real. someone needs to check the actual court records to determine whether any such law suit actuall exists.


  2. LOL that is why I took screen shots of it. Just for these type doubts and comments. When you screen shot something – there is no fakery compared to copying the info.

    Also… you see how it is on Marketwatch? Which I screen shot that page too, as shown above. hhhmmm…. so still think it is a fake story?

  3. It’s not fake. I saw it and red it with my own eyes yesterday.

  4. here are my questions and observations:

    1) did this story orginate from PRNnewswire? this story is listed on their website: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/most-popular-news/
    third one from the top.

    2) this press release is time stamped at 10/25/12 2:09pm eastern on all website posts. heres one on yahoo: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/major-banks-governmental-officials-comrade-180900690.html
    do we know that cnbc was the first to post it? goodness I thought came to mind, Krim used to work for yahoo.
    has anyone else found this press release out there besides cnbc, marketwatch (a yahoo provider), and yahoo?

    3) I find the press release itself strange in the wording of using the words “banksters”. this sounds like something youd read on a blog (no offense) not a professional news release. any thoughts?


  5. Here’s the actual court documents:

  6. I saw the court documents on intelhub.com with the story, the doc has 900 plus pages.

  7. Well the fact is, there is a blank page where an article should be and there are two dead children of a CNBC exec.


  8. Wow! Sherrie. Great job in doing a screen capture. Blank page at CNBC but the article still remains at the Wall Street Journal affiliated publication called Market Watch.

    The link is here….. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/major-banks-governmental-officials-and-their-comrade-capitalists-targets-of-spire-law-group-llps-racketeering-and-money-laundering-lawsuit-seeking-return-of-43-trillion-to-the-united-states-treasury-2012-10-25

    I will be linking back to this article. Thanks!

    Also the court documents have been released by my fellow bloggers at Removing The Shackles and Soldier Hugs. I will have the documents also available at my blog site as well. Thanks


  9. on the murders:

    10/25/12 the new york times reports:

    When Ms. Krim returned around 5:30 p.m., the commissioner said, she found a dark apartment. She went back down to the lobby to ask the doorman if he had seen the nanny and her children. When told that they had not left the building, she returned to the apartment. She looked around in the quiet rooms. Finally, she turned the lights on in the bathroom — and discovered her two children in the bathtub and the nanny unconscious on the floor.


    10/26/12 the new york times reported:

    On Thursday evening around 5:30, Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly said, Marina Krim returned to her Upper West Side apartment with her 3-year-old daughter to discover her two other children, a 2-year-old boy and a 6-year-old girl, dead of knife wounds in the bathtub and Ms. Ortega slashing herself with the same bloodied kitchen knife used on the children.





  10. May the MASS ARRESTS begin!


  11. I was reading through some of the comments on one of the articles that had been published about this horrific crime and something caught my eye. Charlotte Friedman, a retiree that lived in the building and was most likely the LAST person to see the children alive had started a thread at a crime sleuthing website BEFORE any of the reports were hitting main stream.

    She rode in the ELEVATOR with the children and her nanny and had spoken w/ Lulu about her dancing. If you go to this thread and begin reading on this page:

    you’ll notice that when the first pictures of the nanny were hitting the web, she INSISTED that this was NOT the Nanny! She insists that the nanny had a much fuller face, and was much older, and didn’t look anything like the pictures that had been released of the supposed nanny. She said the lady on the gurney in the pictures was the nanny, not the one in the previous pictures. I noticed also that the lady in the gurney has naturally curly/wavy hair, and the tan skinned nanny that has been pictured as being the nanny by the press not only has straight hair, but is much smaller and darker.

    Keep in mind that this woman has seen this family and their nanny for TWO YEARS, and was in the ELEVATOR with her RIGHT BEFORE the murders. She INSISTS that the pictures of the nanny that came out were NOT the same woman she knew as the as the nanny and saw in the elevator that day.

    Another interesting point, some of the msm articles have the mother trying to stop the bleeding of the NANNY, but not her own kids???? Makes no sense. Most of the MSM articles are BS, and this is coming from Charlotte Friedman, the last lady to see the children alive, and the lady that was the FIRST PERSON TO CALL THE POLICE as she is the one who first encountered Mrs. Krim in the mezanine.


  12. I’m going reserve judgment. “Poisoning the well” is a common trick used by “the man” in order to discredit alternative news sources. Searching court records, as one suggested, would be the next step to verify all of this. We’re dealing with amoral people that have nearly infinite power and resources, so anything is possible.

    “The covert operators that I ran with would blow up a 747 with 300 people to kill one person. They are total sociopaths with no conscience whatsoever.” – Gene Wheaton, former Pentagon CID Investigator


  13. If those people can do such things, how can they be stopped? These people who created this crime have no morals, no character, no love for humanity at all.
    No wonder there is no news being reported. All of those people on center stage on the MSM are black mailed, not able to get the truth out there to the public. What a huge ring of terror these people are. They “state” that the terrorists are overseas, diverting the attention over there instead of what is really going on. Following the money discloses the truth, and that is something they can’t hide from. The truth is being released, nothing is going to stop it now.


  14. This was file on April 17th–why are just hearing about it now??


  15. Charlotte Friedman printed off the picture of the nanny in the news, and then took it to the doorman and super and they assured her that it was indeed the same woman as the ones that were posted online. Apparently, this woman’s looks had changed quite drastically in a short period? Reports vary, she has been “w/ the family” anywhere from 1-4 years. Charlotte and the superintendent recalled 2 yrs, from what she has written. Strange. http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8509622&postcount=403


  16. this seems like the obama kid in Mexico when that story got yanked down off of all news sites. Why would it be taken down? What is the motive for trying to keep this quiet?


  17. The websleuths story has disappeared too.


  18. You bet. Now let’s revisit Robert Holmes…. and Aurora… remember that? It’s not on the news anymore, right.

    Murder she wrote?


  19. Interesting that it was first reported that the mother found the nanny on the floor, already wounded, but later the story was changed, saying the nanny was conscious and stabbing herself in the neck as the mother walked in. Seems pretty wildly different: no one would mistake someone stabbing themselves in the neck for someone dying on the ground.

    But it makes sense given that the mother HAS to say it was the nanny to protect her other child from the assassins. Notable that the mother’s blog has been taken down by investigators (can’t have the public investigating for themselves, we might find more holes in the official story).

    Interesting as well that the person that said the person killed was NOT the nanny has now recanted that, saying that she didn’t have it straight because she only saw the family several times a week, not every day, like the doorman (who says it WAS the nanny) does.

    We’ll never know the truth though…


  20. Sherrie I believe the Spire Law Group is a hoax and perhaps CNBC was hacked. Here is why visit their website http://spire-law.com/the-firm/:

    Notice how doughnut is spelled for Krispy Kreme. Here is Krispy Kreme’s website, it is incorrect. http://www.krispykreme.com/home

    This seems like a minute detail, except an attorney would not disgrace his customer by making a mistake like that. Doughnut is used in Krispy Kreme’s branding. Donuts is a Dunkin Donuts branding and would be offensive to Krispy Kreme’s executive management.

    Branding is serious business and lawyers know it.

    Not a business phone number http://phonebook.bz/1-877-438-8766

    World Oil Co. is World Oil Corporation
    Sony Corporation is Sony Corporation of America


  21. Actually they are real and I have spoken to the office in the past about MERS related suits.

    You may have gone to another site other than theirs. They are a real law group and have filed suits against the Federal Reserve in the past too.

  22. David Wilcock reported this story in great depth last December. He received death threats…check out his website..


  23. David Wilcock expained it all in great depth last December. There are many pages of information to digest. He received death threats apparently….


  24. Actually it’s another lawsuit Wilcock’s referring to, one filed in November 2011. So it appears this latest one is a separate lawsuit/story. I sense cointelpro.

  25. Sherrie, at some point is everyone in this blog going to try to spread this to every major news outlet? I honestly believe this is our window to get them exposed once and for all.


  26. Hey Sherrie, me again I hate to disappoint everyone, but this turned out to be a fraud, never was real to begin with. It’s upsetting there’s sick people out there making fake stories only to crush our hope thinking it was real.


  27. You’re a disinfo idiot of an agent. How can this be a FRAUD or not REAL when there’s a case file and IS in the court system in NY?

  28. Anon, do you have a link or more info?

    I keep thinking this seem like the Holmes situation. The msm can’t keep their stories straight, if you believe one version she was unconscious when the mother found her and then it could be that she was a victim and someone dosed her with scopolamine.


  29. Hi all,

    Very interesting article. Reluctantly I’ve concluded it’s BS after visiting the Spire site at: http://spire-law.com/the-firm/

    Besides looking quite amateur, the California state bar registration number quoted brings you to this page: http://members.calbar.ca.gov/fal/Member/Detail/54393 which belongs to one individual who has resigned and is no longer allowed to practice law in Cal.

    This could be a typo, or perhaps I missed something.

    However, the fact is that the CNBC story is still out there, freely published on the net: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/major-banks-governmental-officials-and-their-comrade-capitalists-targets-of-spire-law-group-llps-racketeering-and-money-laundering-lawsuit-seeking-return-of-43-trillion-to-the-united-states-treasury-175828861.html

    Besides this, the questions remain about why Kevin Krim was supposedly targeted when he has nothing to do with the original lawsuit. Surely the pressure would be put on the individuals filing the lawsuit in the first place? No-one with CNBC decided to turn whistle-blower after someone made the request to pull the story when this horrible tragedy took place?

    If it was a professional hit, you could bet your bottom dollar the nanny would no longer be breathing rather than waking up in hospital and spilling the beans. Let’s hope the media keeps us up to date on the nanny’s testimony.

    That is all from me.

    Forest Rockwell


  30. So if this was a professional hit and the nanny dies you would think it might be a professional hit. But because the nanny lives, even though its reported that her wrists and throat are cut , you conclude it could not be a professional hit just because she did not die. I assert, if she dies she could not be a scapegoat for the killings. If she lives who will believe she did not do it. She will be convicted in the mass media immediately. I suspect the nanny is a victim and not the killer.

  31. I didn’t asked to be insulted, I did my research on it, and it turned out to be fake. Disinfo agent this, disinfo agent that, if you can’t backup it up with research then I’m sorry. Sorry to inform you if think I’m so kind of bad guy which I’m not, I’m just a regular guy who wants justice just as much as you do, but I’ve been careful to what I read and somebody provided me this:



  32. Also in the case of Iceland, no that is for real and I’m glad Iceland did the right thing.


  33. I get it now..

    The conspiracy leaders, as it were, have helped spire rip you all off – that is why you are all so afraid to admit the simple facts:

    1) Spire LLP = not an LLP
    2) Spire Lawyers = known criminals.

    Maybe everyone is calling spire all “I will not tell anyone i left the suit if you just give me my money back!!”


  34. Of course there are going to be posts stating the case is a hoax, the damage done by CNBC must be undone in order to divert the public’s attention. I have been reading the 912 page complaint all day, and I can say that I am extremely proud that there are still honest lawyers out there. These poor bastards attempting to take on the most powerful men in the world need our support, they need their struggle to be made public. The senseless murder of two innocent children and an innocent maid was meant to be a lesson to other major news organizations, a real warning that will surely silence our media. But those killings also helped to bring this story to light. The three who were killed will forever be remembered as the silent whistleblowers who brought support to a great cause, the cause of taking our nations freedom and wealth back from the few elite. Without this story coming to our attention, chances are the suit would be silenced and the powerful would continue to gain the upperhand. This is an historic moment in our nations history: never has our wealth been looted in what the complaint compares to viking style plunder, never has our country been so near the edge of a cliff called despotism. This case may be our last chance to fight back legally, and these few decent men and women need for their struggle to be noted. Without popular recognition of this fight, evil will surely triumph in its determined effort to conquer and silence the american people-the wealthiest and most dangerous peasant class in the world. If we stand together and focus a nation’s-worth of eyes onto this hearing, we cannot tell what will happen, but something will happen: maybe a returning of a few trillion, maybe martial law, but at least things will not continue in the direction they are going… If this battle is lost, and our elite retain their ability to plunder and steal until americans are as helpless as the rest of the world’s peasants, the fight will have to become an illegal one, one marked by nonviolent civil disobedience. Banner of “No Taxiation Without Representation” must fly again. The fact that the powerful may only rule when given “the consent of the governed” will be renewed in the minds of the population that once fought tyranny and that will be forced soon to fight it again, hopefully bloodlessly. The next weapon, if this case fails, must be a nationwide boycot on taxes. A date must be set, perhaps a halfyear from the inevitable ruling in favor of power, and on that date every american who no longer wants to be robbed will stop handing his money to the robber. Every American as a patriotic duty to reject the ruling class as it exists. Every American must stop contributing to the largest and ugliest power structure humankind has yet erected. Every American, at a certain point, MUST refuse to let themselves be taxed by an immoral government.

Read Full Post »

(This article is taken from the excellent NaturalNews.com website.)

See also: Burzynski – FDA Timeline

Burzynski documentary reveals true agenda of FDA and cancer industry to destroy cancer cures that really work

Thursday, July 14, 2011
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com

(NaturalNews) As I’ve written about many times before, the cancer industry with all of its research, campaigns, and fundraising activities is really nothing more than a giant, corrupt business venture. As crazy as it might sound to some, the point of the cancer industry is not really to cure cancer — it is to keep raising money for the alleged, and never-ending, “search for the cure.” And the hard-hitting documentary Burzynski The Movie – Cancer Is Serious Business exposes all this as director Eric Merola tracks the 14-year battle of Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski — the man responsible for creating the all-natural, non-toxic cancer cure featured in the film — to protect his unique protocol from being stolen by the government and Big Pharma, and to defend his freedom to treat cancer patients with unconventional methods.

The complete, full-length documentary is available now at NaturalNews.TV:

And check out the official website at:

Dr. Burzynski’s work threatens the viability of the cancer industry

Back in the 1970s, Dr. Burzynski came up with a theory about cancer and cancer treatment that was far different from the conventional paradigm of targeting cancer cells via chemotherapy and radiation treatments. After verifying the legitimacy of this theory, Dr. Burzynski developed a unique, natural formula made from peptides and amino acids that effectively corrects the gene malfunctions that he discovered were the true culprits responsible for the growth and proliferation of cancer cells.

This treatment, which he named antineoplastons, effectively balances the levels of oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes — the two type of genes involved in cancer growth — which in turn prevents cancer cells from surviving. To make a long story short, this simple protocol effectively targets all these genes, as well as all forms of cancer, without causing any negative side effects or lost quality of life.

Since its original development, Dr. Burzynski has improved and refined the formula, and has successfully treated many patients with all kinds of cancers, including young children with supposedly “incurable” cancers like childhood brainstem gliomas.

But Dr. Burzynski’s success did not go unnoticed by authorities with a different agenda. The Texas Medical Board (Dr. Burzynski’s practice is located near Houston) and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), both obviously threatened by his work, eventually went after Dr. Burzynski and tried to shut down his office and destroy his reputation. In the end they were unsuccessful, which represents a huge victory for medical freedom, but they put him through hell for over 14 years — and they continue to deprive him and his work of necessary and rightful funding.

Dr. Burzynski’s research has received FDA approval for clinical trials, but he has never been given any research funding

There is so much to the story of Dr. Burzynski that simply does not fit in this short article. But one thing you need to know about him is that his work has been so tried, tested, and successful, that the US government actually tried to steal his patents. This, of course, came after years of trying to have him arrested and jailed for his work and treatment methods, which the FDA and others alleged were illegal. (Hint: Anything that actually works to reverse cancer is quickly and aggressively declared “illegal” by the medical establishment. This is necessary to continue the cancer scheme that promises a cure but only delivers suffering and death at high profit…)

Since 1977, Dr. Burzynski has been trying to get his antineoplastons treatment approved by the FDA, and to this day it has only been granted Phase III FDA clinical trials. And this granting came after years of battling the FDA in court, which brought him before a grand jury at least four different times, and all for absolutely no legitimate reason other than to harass and potentially bankrupt him.

In the documentary, there is a very telling clip of an Oversight and Investigation Subcommittee hearing deliberator delivering the news to then-FDA Commissioner Dr. David A. Kessler that the agency had no case against Dr. Burzynski, that none of the grand juries had found any fault with his work or practice, and that there was no valid indictment. And yet this did not stop the FDA from continuing its harassment of Dr. Burzynski for years to come, that is until the agency’s fictitious case against him eventually crumbled to ruin, which paved the way for the reluctant approval of his formula in clinical trials.

Even though Dr. Burzynski finally received approval to administer his treatment in FDA-approved clinical trials — which, again, is a very significant victory in and of itself — there are two crucial pieces of information to the case that illustrate the true agenda behind the cancer industry.

First, none of Dr. Burzynski’s trials have ever received a dime of federal funding for cancer research. The US National Cancer Institute (NCI) has distributed hundreds of millions of dollars to conventional cancer research, which as we all know has been a failure, but none of this money has ever been directed to Dr. Burzynski’s work — in fact, the federal government has prohibited taxpayer money from funding Dr. Burzynski’s highly successful research.

Second, cancer patients are only allowed to participate in Dr. Burzynski’s trials if they have already gone through conventional cancer treatments that have been deemed unsuccessful. With the exception of a few cases where exemptions were granted, most of Dr. Burzynski’s patients have come to him in extremely poor health as a result of the brain-frying, immune system-destroying chemotherapy and radiation treatments to which they were previously summoned — and yet the success rate of Dr. Burzynski’s treatment blows conventional treatments right out of the water.

Burzynski The Movie shatters the illusion that the cancer industry is actually trying to cure cancer

There is so much to Burzynski The Movie that you really need to watch it for yourself. A few highlights from the film are:

• The proper response to cancer is not to blast the body with toxic chemicals and radiation, but rather to feed it various nutrients and compounds that communicate naturally with genes how to effectively destroy cancer cells on their own.

• The Burzynski treatment is the only cure for “incurable” brainstem gliomas that has been tested in FDA-approved trials — and it successfully cures up to 50 percent of them, while conventional treatments cure absolutely zero.

• Congressional passage of the “Prescription Drug User Fee Act” in 1992 is the reason why the FDA has become Big Pharma’s lapdog. The law basically allows drug companies to purchase approval for drugs from the FDA through drug application user fees, which has stunted any real mainstream progress in discovering a cure for cancer.

• Drug companies spent more than half a billion dollars in 2010 alone purchasing drug approvals from the FDA — and the average amount spent per conventional cancer drug was nearly $1.5 million (can you see now why there is a huge vested interest in stifling Dr. Burzynski’s work?)

• The FDA has already approved more than 25 different cancer drugs that mimic Dr. Burzynski’s treatment protocol by targeting the genes responsible for cancer growth — but none of these drugs are effective because they are synthetic copycats that target only one or two genes, rather than the nearly 100 genes that Dr. Burzynski’s treatment targets.

• Most or all of the chemotherapy drugs that doctors prescribe actually cause cancer — and this “side effect” sits alongside other devastating ones like heart failure, infertility, nerve damage, and kidney damage.

• Many of the FDA’s drug approval advisers and committee members also hold positions at major drug companies, which means they are anything but objective in the decisions they make concerning cancer drugs.

The personal healing stories, the extensive background, and the thorough details surrounding the entire Dr. Burzynski saga are truly fascinating. This is definitely a documentary I highly recommend, and one that you won’t want to miss. The good news is that the film’s creators have graciously posted the movie in its entirety for FREE at NaturalNews.TV:

Learn more about the movie at:

NaturalNews wishes to thank Eric Merola, the documentary producers, for allowing us to post and promote this extraordinary documentary film. Watch it and share it, folks. This is a groundbreaking bit of medical history that exposes the raw truth of the cancer industry’s true agenda.

Read Full Post »


Res ipsa loquitur - The thing itself speaks

Amber Lyon

"Well-behaved women seldom make history..."

Writings of J. Todd Ring

Independent Research and Analysis, Essays in Politics and Philosophy.

________________Child Health Safety_________________

The facts about vaccine safety your government won't give you