Interview on Guns and Butter with Bonnie Faulkner

Quote:We discuss Michael Hoffman's book, Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare, published in April 2001; the Revelation of the Method or Making Manifest All That Is Hidden; the Cryptocracy; occult public psychodrama; alchemical processing; metaphysical alchemy; the lone nut syndrome; the cryonic process of freeze and thaw; the Kennedy assassination as a killing of the king rite; revealing the method lends an air of invulnerability to the criminals; mystical toponymy; Kubrick's 2001 A Space Odyssey; advanced mind control; history and objectives of Freemasonry; synchronicity and coincidence; pattern detection; the subconscious group or dreaming mind; manipulation at a spiritual and psychological warfare level.

The British road to Dirty War

by Professor David Betz, Professor Michael Rainsborough

https://briefingsforbrexit.com/the-briti...dirty-war/

Written by Professor David Betz, Professor Michael Rainsborough

Quote:The Remainer establishment appears indifferent to strong feelings in the country, and seems poised to throw petrol on the flames. We may all regret the consequences.

Post Segments

The rise of the new political establishment
Towards state capture
Betting against the people
A cornered political class
Throwing away the rule book
Yellow vests / white vans
Where are we going?
Behold the new Bourbons

What do you get when you have a Conservative party that doesn't conserve, a Labour party that doesn't represent the interests of the working class, and a Liberal Democrat Party that is neither liberal nor democratic?

The answer is, a pretty accurate description of the current British political landscape. Here are different kinds of political ice cream for sale, but when licked they all turn out to have roughly the same unpalatable taste: a bland, socially progressive, anti-traditionalist, globalist, corporatist flavour. And, you the people, don't ask for anything else! We know how to make ice cream. You don't.

Of course, it is Brexit and the reactions of the political classes to it, that most clearly reveals the startling democratic deficit in the United Kingdom. Brexit is, though, not the cause of political strife. It is merely the symptom that has brought these latent anti-democratic inclinations to the surface. Arguably, they have always been there in one form or another since ancient times.

In November 2016, Nigel Farage told the BBC's Andrew Marr: Believe you me, if the people in the country think they're going to be cheated, they're going to be betrayed, then we will see political anger the likes of which none of us in our lifetimes have ever witnessed in this country'. It was an obvious point and true. Yet the striking thing about such a warning has been the degree to which national politicians and media have tried to ignore it.

How, we might wonder, has it all come to this and, just as vitally, what are the possible long-term consequences?

The rise of the new political establishment

That there has existed a patrician political establishment in Britain, which has for many years implicitly assumed a right to rule based on a patronage system of education, class, and social connections has been indisputably validated over the years by those like Jeremy Paxman, whose instructive book, Friends in High Places: Who Runs Britain (1990), appeared 30 years ago.

It has only been within the past two decades, however, that commentators, such as Peter Oborne in The Triumph of the Political Class (2008), noted the growth of a new ruling establishment, which despite its outward modernity, has become ever more careerist, self-serving, cynical and manipulative, especially in its reliance on spin and clientelistic relations with mainstream media outlets. Characteristic of this political class has been an increasing disconnection with, and often contempt for, the rest of us.

As a consequence of the decline of mass based parties political reliance on big-business donors has grown. At the same time a technocratic political elite has arisen that is willing to contract out decision-making to supranational organisations like the European Union, the International Monetary Fund, and United Nations on just about everything from finance, the law, border security, and the environment. The result is what political theorist Peter Mair perceived as increasingly hollowed out national political institutions. One had the technical appearance of democracy, via things like elections, but no real substance. Whoever was elected to office merely perpetuated the same ruling orthodoxy under slightly different guises.

The title of Peter Mair's work in which he observed the rise of post-national and post-democratic practices was Ruling the Void (2013). And, presiding over a democratic void is just how the new political classes like it, for in this state they remain largely unaccountable, free from serious scrutiny, and free to propagate and enrich themselves.

Towards state capture

All this, it might be said, merely reflects human nature, which has a predisposition to form into hierarchies, with powerful elites and sectional interests establishing themselves at the top of the social structure. Amongst others, Adam Smith recognised this condition in his discourse on the economics of markets. Successful enterprises, which may once have sprung from free-markets, have a tendency to grow into monopolies and oligopolies that contrive to rig the market in ways that keep prices artificially high and exclude competitors.

For thinkers like Adam Smith the rule of law was intended to maintain balance and ensure the integrity and fairness of the market to prevent monopolistic behaviour. In a not dissimilar manner, the role of parliament in a mature democracy like Britain was to balance out competing interests and claims to power, which included giving a voice to the lower orders. For such a system to flourish it required parliamentarians to be somewhat representative of the people who elected them. Thus, they functioned as the will of the people in parliament, whom through dialogue and debate would mediate and resolve issues in a manner that broadly accorded with the expressed wishes of the electorate.

With the rise of the new political classes, a different political dynamic is emerging. Drawn from similar backgrounds (often middle-class, university educated, with little prior career experience outside politics itself), members of parliament increasingly sound alike, think alike and act alike. The evolution of a monochrome political establishment is producing a radical disconnect, which the Brexit denouement is throwing into stark relief. What we appear to be witnessing is the corrupt mutation of the notion of the representation of the people in parliament, into the substitution of the will of the people by the interests of the political class. We are entering the realms, no less, of state capture.

What happens when sectional interests capture the political institutions of the state? This is a question we will get to, but first it is worth reiterating that in many senses this has been a long time coming, and to emphasise, in the British case has little or nothing intrinsically to do with Brexit. Therefore, let's take a dive back into the recent past to identify at least some of the sources of this political mutation.

Betting against the people

It seems that for at least twenty years the new political classes in Britain have been placing a bet on the political future. They are betting on the quiescence of the public at large, who will either not notice or not care that elites are entrenching their own power and interests. They are gambling that the public, kept compliant by political spinning, a constant diet of soaps and reality television, debt, social media pap, welfare dependency and the like, will not work themselves up into any state of anger of the sort anticipated by Nigel Farage if their political preferences are dishonoured. Or at least not enough of them will to make a difference.

In other words, for many years now, governments, along with a significant fraction of the population, have calculated that the bulk of the people can either be kept in a state of apathy or bullied into submission. How, it might be asked, have they reached such conclusions?

To start, let us go back to 1989, and illustrate how times have changed. In that year, thousands of British Muslims, mainly from the Barelvi and Deobandi communities, rioted and called for the death of the novelist Salman Rushdie on account of his portrayal of Mohammed in the novel The Satanic Verses. The novel was shortlisted for the Booker Prize in 1988 but lost out to Peter Carey's Oscar and Lucinda.

Fast-forward three decades and Rushdie's novel today would likely either be unpublished or quite probably the author would find himself at the wrong end of a hate crime investigation. In an interesting sign of the times, following the killing of 12 of the staff of the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in the spring of 2015 by jihadists for depicting cartoons of the prophet Mohammed, Peter Carey was amongst the many authors who vilified the murdered writers and illustrators, decrying the cultural arrogance of the French nation'. How times change? Je suis ne pas Charlie.

Cumulatively, over the past three decades, then, the empirically demonstrable lesson is that violence and threats work. Crudely, there is simply no arguing with the fact that violence is the deus ex machina for changing the way people think and act. Physical force is a method of political communication, and when it is sustained it invariably succeeds in changing minds and changing policies.

Under the threat of violence, it is often easier for governments to knuckle under for the sake of maintaining a semblance of peace, to wax piously about societal cohesion and resilience, and to climb onwards as though the status quo ante were not crumbling beneath them. The progressive factions of academia, culture, and media cheer them for it. So, if the populace don't really react in the face of such threats and actual violence, and merely light candles and hug teddy bears, then the bet of the political classes is sustained. They have gambled correctly.

A cornered political class

The flipside of this bet against the political future is that it operates under a level of diminishing returns. When it becomes evident, as it increasingly has in many Western societies, that changing things politically is nearing impossible within the rules of the system, by the power of the ballot not the bullet, the calculus begins to change. When it seems that the system is so kludged up because the government is weak, parliament is duplicitous, the bureaucracy is intransigent, the odds on sustaining the gamble lengthen.

To illuminate the point, extreme Europhiles fail to apprehend the significance of the current moment. Imagine, if the UK had elected to stay in the EU, voting 52% Remain against 48% to Leave on 23 June 2016, what would be the mood in Remainer households if Prime Minister Boris Johnson just announced that on the advice of his Europe Minister Jacob Rees-Mogg that Britain was leaving the European Union after all? Would apathy reign?

It is not as though the playbook of the Remain fraction, namely, most of the political classwhich is a minority fraction in the country, but a majority fraction, in parliamenthas been particularly clever or inscrutable. On the contrary, it has unfolded almost entirely as Eurosceptics expected that it would: delay declaration of article 50, hobble the withdrawal negotiations, continue Project Fear, and most unforgivably sabotage meaningful No Deal preparations.

Aside from the lack of artifice in the Remainer/political class strategy, in the face of an obvious attempt to frustrate the democratically expressed will of the people, the odds lengthen further. Control over events begins to be break down. Parliament votes for an in/out referendum: the establishment almost uniformly campaigns to Remain. The government warns of the dire consequences. Foreign governments are dragooned to bolster the message. But the people, having grown sceptical of the political classes for the past two decades, vote to leave anyway.

Trapped by a result they didn't want or expect, the major parties both, nevertheless, fight the general election on a manifesto pledge to honour the result of the referendum. The government defends its right to declare article 50 in the High Court and then Parliament votes for it setting a date of departure, 29 March 2019, to which we are now speeding. Events have slipped out of the control of the political elites.

Throwing away the rule book

There is a dominant theory of the cause of revolutions, analysed by those like Ted Robert Gurr in Why Men Rebel (1970), according to which people rebel not so much when they are materially deprived or when they are repressed but when a significant gap materialises between the future they have been promised and expect and the reality of their actual circumstance.

Consider these promises: In or out, you decide, we implement', Prime Minister David Cameron said during the referendum. No deal is better than a bad deal', Prime Minister Theresa May pitched in afterward, adding Brexit means Brexit', to boot. Consider then the messages now emanating from Westminster: not-Brexit is Brexit! Vote again but do it right this time! No deal cannot be contemplated (or planned for)!

Political theory, especially in the British tradition stemming from philosophers such as John Locke, enshrines the principle that democratic political order rests firmly upon the consent of the people to be governed. People are individually naturally and rightfully free, but they surrender some of their liberty in return for some collective goods. It is this practice that is embodied in the mother of parliaments', which is perceived as being a gift to the world. As seen in the founding acts of the now Commonwealth dominions, these gifts may be summarised as peace, order, and good government.

The system works because everyone behaves by the rules. On either side of the bargainthe governed and the governmentmutual obligations are observed in service of the common interest, which is the stable continuance of a non-tyrannical political order. Here we come to the disquieting part of the continuing Remain campaign, a campaign that seemingly supersedes party loyalty, not to mention national loyalty, which is its willingness to throw away the rulebook. Only a brazenly confidant, or foolishly out-of-touch, political class would chance this. The bet on the future is doubled.

The object of all these machinations has been to corral the British population into a Hobson's choice between Brexit-In-Name-Only and no-Brexit. It is no secret now. The plotters, finally, so close to the bell calling time on Britain's membership of the EU with a deal or without one, have declared it openly that they will not permit to occur what is the current legally mandated outcome of events. They will instead tie the government in knots, prevent its preparations for No Deal Brexit, and if necessary, crash it.

Yellow vests / white vans

Thus, we come to the ultimate gamble of the political class, one that appears strongly to be operative in the minds of many in Parliament, namely, that Britons do not rebel and, therefore, faced with a fait accompli they will lump it even if they do not like it. Unlike the French, Italians, or Germans each of which nation is prone in its own way to violent mass spasms of political passion, the British are a phlegmatic people given to the sensible path. So the cliché goes.

It is true to an extent that revolution is a continental phenomenon that does not travel well across the English ChannelBritish governments have been better at responding to incipient uprisings, sometimes deflecting them, betimes co-opting their leaders, but mostly muddling through by accommodating their demands within the parameters of the status quo. This is a system that has succeeded precisely because parliamentary democracy, for over 300 years now, is able to internalise the will of the people, even when faced with threats of violent revolt, be it in the demands of Chartists, Irish nationalists or suffragettes.

Should we be so sanguine to believe that the British political system, for so long a beacon of stability, is immune from the turbulence that has afflicted other societies? As Remainers are so keen to remind us, we are not an island whose fortunes and follies are separate from those of our near-neighbours. If people, goods, and ideas flow freely across the borders of Europe why should not the concept of the Yellow Jackets too? White Van Man voted strongly for Brexit, after all. Why should there be an Alternative for Germany movement but not an alternative for Britain, even though the people were asked to choose one and did?

Where are we going?

To these questions, the British establishment appears curiously indifferent, underestimating the degree to which passions in the country are inflamed, not on the radicalised' fringes but squarely in the middle, and more than half of Parliament looks poised to throw petrol on the flames. Pundits often talk of the Westminster bubble' but it would be better to call it a box, a box into which politicians themselves have barricaded themselves.

Those behind the plan to thwart Brexit by altering the standing orders of the House of Commons on the fly imagine this as a temporary alteration to the established mechanisms of power, which will return to normal after Brexit. That is to say, when the rules serve their ends, they are inviolably sacrosanct; but when they do not, they are perfectly mutable administrative procedures. This is not a wholesale reordering of the British constitution', averred one of the plan's prime movers. It would be a one-off surgical strike and afterwards things would go back to normal'. Such thinking reflects an astonishing degree of mental closure, an astonishing degree of hubristic contempt, or an astonishingly dangerous wageranyway it is simply astonishing.

That the political class was taken aback by the 2016 referendum result, demonstrated that it has only a tenuous grasp of the feelings and aspirations of the wider population. If they miscalculated people's position on the EU, then we have no guarantee that the gamble on the people's willingness to remain compliant in the face of further broken promises and the dishonouring of a clear democratic instruction will go unanswered. Political failure has consequences about which the elite seems to have given no thought whatsoever.

Historical parallels are inexact at the best to times but one doesn't have to look too far back to see where the corrosion of democratic legitimacy can and probably will lead. It leads to extreme societal polarisation, and a miasmic concoction of fear, radicalisation and violence. We can see this in the condition that is currently afflicting France and its yellow jacket uprisings. We saw it in Italy in the 1970s and 1980s when the country slid into the anni di piombo the years of the bullet. And, most insidiously, we saw it in the actions of the Latin American governments and their so-called dirty wars, in which sections of the population fought each other openly and covertly.

Behold the new Bourbons

Last week the Transport Secretary Chris Grayling warned that putting a stop to Britain's withdrawal from the EU may end the centuries of moderate' politics that the UK has enjoyed since the English Civil War. Remainer politicians rounded on him, predictably accusing him of scaremongering and practising gutter politics'. The veteran Labour politician Roy Hattersley waxed imperiously, I don't think many people would regard Chris Grayling as an expert on these matters or, indeed, on anything'.

But we are expert on these matters. We have for decades studied why things fall apart, how a stable, essentially self-policing, productive society can turn into an ungovernable tumult roiling with rage. We know that this happens at first very slowly, a creep-creep-creeping to the limit; and then very fast indeed after the limit has been passed. We also know that no amount of free beer and pizza parties will swiftly return a society deranged by the shattering of the social contract by its own elite back to normality.

The Hattersleys of this world are deeply complacent. They are the new Bourbons who have learnt nothing and forgotten nothing. The threat of violence is not absent in the British polity. It is there, lying dormant. From time to time, it even makes an occasional appearance. A hollowed out and increasingly discredited set of political institutions is all it can take to set the flames alight. This is the British road to dirty war. The political classes are sowing the wind. They shall reap the whirlwind.

The third volume of John Newman's JFK series is out now. He mentions that the five volume series may now extend to six. A Kindle version will be available within the week.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/172264897X/ref...56uCxzfvCw

Scientists concerned about sea level rise have long focused on Greenland's southeast and northwest regions, where large glaciers stream iceberg-sized chunks of ice into the Atlantic Ocean. Those chunks float away, eventually melting. But a new study published Jan. 21 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that the largest sustained ice loss from early 2003 to mid-2013 came from Greenland's southwest region, which is mostly devoid of large glaciers.[/FONT]
"Whatever this was, it couldn't be explained by glaciers, because there aren't many there," said Michael Bevis, lead author of the paper, Ohio Eminent Scholar and a professor of geodynamics at The Ohio State University. "It had to be the surface mass -- the ice was melting inland from the coastline."[/FONT]
That melting, which Bevis and his co-authors believe is largely caused by global warming, means that in the southwestern part of Greenland, growing rivers of water are streaming into the ocean during summer. The key finding from their study: Southwest Greenland, which previously had not been considered a serious threat, will likely become a major future contributor to sea level rise.[/FONT]
"We knew we had one big problem with increasing rates of ice discharge by some large outlet glaciers," he said. "But now we recognize a second serious problem: Increasingly, large amounts of ice mass are going to leave as meltwater, as rivers that flow into the sea."[/FONT]
The findings could have serious implications for coastal U.S. cities, including New York and Miami, as well as island nations that are particularly vulnerable to rising sea levels.[/FONT]
And there is no turning back, Bevis said.[/FONT]
"The only thing we can do is adapt and mitigate further global warming -- it's too late for there to be no effect," he said. "This is going to cause additional sea level rise. We are watching the ice sheet hit a tipping point."[/FONT]
Climate scientists and glaciologists have been monitoring the Greenland ice sheet as a whole since 2002, when NASA and Germany joined forces to launch GRACE. GRACE stands for Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment, and involves twin satellites that measure ice loss across Greenland. Data from these satellites showed that between 2002 and 2016, Greenland lost approximately 280 gigatons of ice per year, equivalent to 0.03 inches of sea level rise each year. But the rate of ice loss across the island was far from steady.[/FONT]
Bevis' team used data from GRACE and from GPS stations scattered around Greenland's coast to identify changes in ice mass. The patterns they found show an alarming trend -- by 2012, ice was being lost at nearly four times the rate that prevailed in 2003. The biggest surprise: This acceleration was focused in southwest Greenland, a part of the island that previously hadn't been known to be losing ice that rapidly.[/FONT]
Bevis said a natural weather phenomenon -- the North Atlantic Oscillation, which brings warmer air to West Greenland, as well as clearer skies and more solar radiation -- was building on man-made climate change to cause unprecedented levels of melting and runoff. Global atmospheric warming enhances summertime melting, especially in the southwest. The North Atlantic Oscillation is a natural -- if erratic -- cycle that causes ice to melt under normal circumstances. When combined with man-made global warming, though, the effects are supercharged.[/FONT]
"These oscillations have been happening forever," Bevis said. "So why only now are they causing this massive melt? It's because the atmosphere is, at its baseline, warmer. The transient warming driven by the North Atlantic Oscillation was riding on top of more sustained, global warming."[/FONT]
Bevis likened the melting of Greenland's ice to coral bleaching: Once the ocean's water hits a certain temperature, coral in that region begins to bleach. There have been three global coral bleaching events. The first was caused by the 1997-98 El Niño, and the other two events by the two subsequent El Niños. But El Niño cycles have been happening for thousands of years -- so why have they caused global coral bleaching only since 1997?[/FONT]
"What's happening is sea surface temperature in the tropics is going up; shallow water gets warmer and the air gets warmer," Bevis said. "The water temperature fluctuations driven by an El Niño are riding this global ocean warming. Because of climate change, the base temperature is already close to the critical temperature at which coral bleaches, so an El Niño pushes the temperature over the critical threshold value. And in the case of Greenland, global warming has brought summertime temperatures in a significant portion of Greenland close to the melting point, and the North Atlantic Oscillation has provided the extra push that caused large areas of ice to melt."[/FONT]
Before this study, scientists understood Greenland to be one of the Earth's major contributors to sea-level rise -- mostly because of its glaciers. But these new findings, Bevis said, show that scientists need to be watching the island's snowpack and ice fields more closely, especially in and near southwest Greenland.[/FONT]
GPS systems in place now monitor Greenland's ice margin sheet around most of its perimeter, but the network is very sparse in the southwest, so it is necessary to densify the network there, given these new findings.[/FONT]
"We're going to see faster and faster sea level rise for the foreseeable future," Bevis said. "Once you hit that tipping point, the only question is: How severe does it get?"[/FONT]

"Orders to Kill" Dr. Martin Luther King: The Government that Honors MLK with a National Holiday Killed Him

A Review of The Plot to Kill King by William Pepper

MLK DAY 2019.
Very few Americans are aware of the truth behind the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Few books have been written about it, unlike other significant assassinations, especially JFK's. For almost fifty years there has been a media blackout supported by government deception to hide the truth.
And few people, in a massive act of self-deception, have chosen to question the absurd official explanation, choosing, rather, to embrace a mythic fabrication intended to sugarcoat the bitter fruit that has resulted from the murder of the one man capable of leading a mass movement for revolutionary change in the United States. Today we are eating the fruit of our denial.
In order to comprehend the significance of this extraordinary book, it is first necessary to dispel a widely accepted falsehood about Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. William Pepper does that on the first page.

To understand his death, it is essential to realize that although he is popularly depicted and perceived as a civil rights leader, he was much more than that. A non-violent revolutionary, he personified the most powerful force for the long-overdue social, political, and economic reconstruction of the nation.

In other words, Martin Luther King was a transmitter of a non-violent spiritual and political energy so plenipotent that his very existence was a threat to an established order based on violence, racism, and economic exploitation. He was a very dangerous man.
Revolutionaries are, of course, anathema to the power elites who, with all their might, resist such rebels' efforts to transform society. If they can't buy them off, they knock them off. Forty-eight years after King's assassination, the causes he fought for civil rights, the end to U.S. wars of aggression , and economic justice for all remain not only unfulfilled, but have worsened in so many respects. And King's message has been enervated by the sly trick of giving him a national holiday and urging Americans to make it "a day of service." Needless to say, such service does not include non-violent war resistance or protesting a decadent system of economic injustice.
Because MLK repeatedly called the United States the "greatest purveyor of violence on earth," he was universally condemned by the mass media and government that later once he was long and safely dead praised him to the heavens. This has continued to the present day of historical amnesia.
But William Pepper resurrects the revolutionary MLK, and in doing so shows in striking detail why elements within the U.S. government executed him. After reading this book, no fair-minded reader can reach any other conclusion. The Plot to Kill King, the culminating volume of a trilogy that Pepper has written on the assassination, consists of slightly less text than supporting documentation in its appendices, which include numerous depositions and interviews that buttress Pepper's thesis on the why and how of this horrible murder. It demands a close reading that should put to rest any pseudo-debates about the essentials of the case.
Pepper, an attorney who represented the King family in the 1999 trial that found U.S. officials of the federal (in particular, the FBI and Army Intelligence), state, and local governments responsible for King's assassination, has worked on the King case since 1977. He met MLK in 1967, after King had read his Ramparts' magazine article, "The Children of Vietnam," that exposed the hideous effects of U.S. napalm and white phosphorous bombing on young and old Vietnamese innocents. The text and photos of that article reduced King to tears and were instrumental in his increased opposition to the war against Vietnam as articulated in his dramatic Riverside Church speech ("Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence") on April 4, 1967, one year to the day before his execution in Memphis. That speech, in which King so powerfully and publically linked the war with racism and economic exploitation, foretold his death at the hands of the perpetrators of those abominations.
Devastated by King's death, and assuming the alleged assassin James Earl Ray was responsible, Pepper retreated from the fray until a 1977 conversation with the Rev. Ralph Abernathy, King's associate, who raised the specter of Ray's innocence. After a five hour interrogation of the imprisoned Ray in 1978, Pepper was convinced that Ray did not shoot King and set out on a forty year quest to uncover the truth.
Before examining the essentials of Pepper's discovery, it is important to point out that MLK, Jr, his father, Rev. M. L. King, Sr, and his maternal grandfather, Rev. A.D. Williams, all pastors of Atlanta's Ebenezer Baptist Church, were spied on by Army Intelligence and the FBI since 1917. All were considered communist sympathizers and dangerous to the reigning hegemony because of their espousal of racial and economic equality. When MLK, Jr. forcefully denounced unjust and immoral war-making as well, and announced his Poor People's Campaign and intent to lead a massive peaceful encampment of hundreds of thousands in Washington, D.C., he set off panic in the bowels of government spies and their masters. Seventy-five years of spying on black religious leaders here found its ultimate "justification." As Stokely Carmichael, co-chairman of the Student Non-violent Coordinating Committee, said to King in a conversation secretly recorded by Army Intelligence, "The man don't care you call ghettos concentration camps, but when you tell him his war machine is nothing but hired killers, you got trouble."
It is against this "trouble" that Pepper's investigation must be set, as that "trouble" is also the background for the linked assassinations of JFK, Malcolm X, and RFK. Understanding the forces behind the military, the spies, and the gunmen who, while operating in the shadows, are actually the second layer of the onion skin, is essential. The government and mainstream corporate media form the outer layer with their collusion in disinformation, lying, and truth suppression, but Pepper correctly identifies the core as follows.

Bombastic, chauvinistic, corporate propaganda aside, where the slaughter of innocents is, and always was, justified in the name of patriotism and national security, it has always and ever been about money. Corporate and financial leaders trusted with the keys to the Republic's treasure moved from boardrooms to senior government positions and back again. Construction, oil and gas, defense industry, and pharmaceutical corporations, their bankers, brokers, and executives thrive in a war economy. Fortunes are made and dynasties created and perpetuated and a cooperating elite permeates an entire society and ultimately contaminates the world in its drive for national resources wherever they are ….Vietnam was his [King's] Rubicon …. Here, as never before, would he seriously challenge the interests of the power elite.

MLK was assassinated on April 4, 1968 at 6:01 PM as he stood on the balcony of the Lorraine Motel in Memphis, Tennessee. He was shot in the lower right side of his face by one rifle bullet that shattered his jaw, damaged his upper spine, and came to rest below his left shoulder blade. The U.S. government claimed the assassin was a racist loner named James Earl Ray, who had escaped from the Missouri State Penitentiary on April 23, 1967. Ray was alleged to have fired the fatal shot from a second-floor bathroom window of a rooming house above the rear of Jim's Grill across the street. Running to his rented room, Ray allegedly gathered his belongings, including the rifle, in a bedspread-wrapped bundle, rushed out the front door onto the adjoining street, and in a panic dropped the bundle in the doorway of the Canipe Amusement Company a few doors down. He was then said to have jumped into his white Mustang and driven to Atlanta where he abandoned the car. From there he fled to Canada and then to England where he was eventually arrested at Heathrow Airport on June 8, 1968 and extradited to the U.S. The state claims that the money Ray needed to purchase the car and for all his travel was secured through various robberies and a bank heist. Ray's alleged motive was racism and that he was a bitter and dangerous loner.

Propaganda, Disinformation and Dirty Tricks: James Earl Ray Was Innocent of the Assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr.

When Ray, under extraordinary pressure, coercion, and a payoff from his lawyer to take a plea, pleaded guilty (only a few days later to request a trial that was denied) and was sentenced to 99 years in prison, the case seemed to be closed, and was dismissed from public consciousness. Another hate-filled lone assassin, shades of Lee Harvey Oswald and Sirhan Sirhan, had committed a despicable deed.
In the years leading up to Pepper's 1978 involvement, only a few lonely voices expressed doubts about the government's case Harold Weisberg in 1971 and Mark Lane and Dick Gregory in 1977. The rest of the country put themselves and the case to sleep. They are still sleeping, but Pepper is trying with this last book to wake them up. Meanwhile, the disinformation specialists continue with their lies.
While a review is not the place to go into every detail of Pepper's rebuttal of the government's shabby claims, let me say at the outset that he emphatically does so, and adds in the process some tentative claims of which he is not certain but which, if true, are stunning.
As with the assassinations of President Kennedy and his brother, Robert (two months after MLK), all evidence points to the construction of patsies to take the blame for government executions. Ray, Oswald, and Sirhan all bear striking resemblances in the ways they were chosen and moved as pawns over long periods of time into positions where their only reactions could be stunned surprise when they were accused of the murders.
It took Pepper many years to piece together the essential truths, once he and Abernathy interviewed Ray in prison in 1978. The first giveaway that something was seriously amiss came with the 1979 House Select Committee on Assassinations' report on the King assassination. Led by Robert Blakey, suspect in his conduct of the other assassination inquiries, who had replaced Richard Sprague, who was deemed to be too independent, "this multi-million dollar investigation ignored or denied all evidence that raised the possibility that James Earl Ray was innocent," and that government forces might be involved. Pepper lists over twenty such omissions that rival the absurdities of the magical thinking of the Warren Commission. The HSCA report became the template "for all subsequent disinformation in print and visual examinations of this case" for the past thirty-seven years.
Pepper's decades-long investigation, not only refutes the government's case against James Earl Ray, but definitively proves that King was killed by a government conspiracy led by the FBI, Army Intelligence, and Memphis Police, assisted by southern Mafia figures. He is right to assert that "we have probably acquired more detailed knowledge about this political assassination than we have ever had about any previous historical event." This makes the silence around this case even more shocking. This shock is accentuated when one is reminded (or told for the first time) that in 1999 a Memphis jury, after a thirty day trial and over seventy witnesses, found the U.S. government guilty in the killing of MLK. The King family had brought the suit and William Pepper represented them. They were grateful that the truth was confirmed, but saddened by the way the findings were buried once again by a media in cahoots with the government.
The civil trial was the King family's last resort to get a public hearing to disclose the truth of the assassination. They and Pepper knew that Ray was an innocent pawn, but Ray had died in prison in 1998 after trying for thirty years to get a trial and prove his innocence (shades of Sirhan Sirhan who still languishes in prison). During all those years, Ray had maintained that he had been manipulated by a shadowy figure named Raul, who supplied him with money and his white Mustang and coordinated all his complicated travels, including having him buy a rifle and come to Jim's Grill and the boarding house on the day of the assassination. The government has always denied that Raul existed.
Blocked at every turn by the authorities and unable to get Ray a trial, Pepper arranged an unscripted, mock TV trial that aired on April 4, 1993, the twenty-fifth anniversary of the assassination. Jurors were selected from a pool of U.S. citizens, a former U.S. Attorney and a federal judge served as prosecutor and judge, with Pepper serving as defense attorney. He presented extensive evidence clearly showing that authorities had withdrawn all security for King; that the state's chief witness was falling down drunk; that the alleged bathroom sniper's nest was empty right before the shot was fired; that three eyewitnesses, including the NY Times Earl Caldwell, said that the shot came from the bushes behind the rooming house; and that two eyewitnesses saw Ray drive away in his white Mustang before the shooting, etc. The prosecution's feeble case was rejected by the jury that found Ray not guilty.
As with all Pepper's work on the case (including book reviews), the mainstream media responded with silence. And though this was only a TV trial, increasing evidence emerged that the owner of Jim's Grill, Loyd Jowers, was deeply involved in the assassination. Pepper dug deeper, and on December 16, 1993, Loyd Jowers appeared on ABC's Primetime Live that aired nationwide. Pepper writes, "Loyd Jowers cleared James Earl Ray, saying that he did not shoot MLK but that he, Jowers, had hired a shooter after he was approached by Memphis produce man Frank Liberto and paid $1,000,000 to facilitate the assassination. He also said that he had been visited by a man names Raul who delivered a rifle and asked him to hold it until arrangements were finalized …. The morning after the Primetime Live broadcast there was no coverage of the previous night's program, not even on ABC …. Here was a confession, on prime time television, to involvement in one of the most heinous crimes in the history of the Republic, and virtually no American mass-media coverage."
In the twenty-three years since that confession, Pepper has worked tirelessly on the case and has uncovered a plethora of additional evidence that refutes the government's claims and indicts it and the media for a continuing cover-up. The evidence he has gathered, detailed and documented in The Plot to Kill King, proves that Martin Luther King was killed by a conspiracy masterminded by the U.S. government. Much of his evidence was presented at the 1999 trial, while other was subsequently discovered. Since the names and details involved make clear that, as with the murders of JFK and RFK, the conspiracy was very sophisticated with many moving parts organized at the highest level, I will just highlight a few of his findings in what follows. A reader should read the book to understand the full scope of the plot, its execution, and the cover-up.

• Pepper refutes the government and proves, through multiple witnesses, telephonic, and photographic evidence, that Raul existed; that his full name is Raul Coelho; and that he was James Earl Ray's intelligence handler, who provided him with money and instructions from their first meeting in the Neptune Bar in Montreal, where Ray had fled in 1967 after his prison escape, until the day of the assassination. It was Raul who instructed Ray to return to the U.S. (an act that makes no sense for an escaped prisoner who had fled the country), gave him money for the white Mustang, helped him attain travel documents, and moved him around the country like a pawn on a chess board. The parallels to Lee Harvey Oswald and Sirhan Sirhan are startling.
  
• He presents the case of Donald Wilson, a former FBI agent working out of the Atlanta office in 1968, who went with a senior colleague to check out an abandoned white Mustang with Alabama plates (Ray's car, to which Raul had a set of keys) and opened the passenger door to find that an envelope and some papers fell out onto the ground. Thinking he may have disturbed a crime scene, the nervous Wilson pocketed them. Later, when he read them, their explosive content intuitively told him that if he gave them to his superiors they would be destroyed. One piece was a torn out page from a 1963 Dallas telephone directory with the name Raul written at the top, and the letter "J" with a Dallas telephone number for a club run by Jack Ruby, Oswald's killer. The page was for the letter H and had numerous phone numbers for H. L. Hunt, Dallas oil billionaire and a friend of FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover. Both men hated MLK. The second sheet contained Raul's name and a list of names and sums and dates for payment. On the third sheet was written the telephone number and extension for the Atlanta FBI office. (Read Jim Douglass's important interview with Donald Wilson in The Assassinations, pp.479-491.)
  
• Pepper interviewed four other witnesses who confirmed that they had seen Raul with Jack Ruby in Dallas in 1963 and that they were associated.
  
• Pepper shows that the alias Ray was given and used from July 1967 until April 4, 1968 Eric Galt was the name of a Toronto operative of U.S. Army Intelligence, Eric St. Vincent Galt, who worked for Union Carbide with Top Secret clearance. The warehouse at the Canadian Union Carbide Plant in Toronto that Galt supervised "housed a top secret munitions project funded jointly by the CIA, the U.S. Naval Surface Weapons Center, and the Army Electronics Research and Development Command …. In August 1967, Galt met with Major Robert M. Collins, a top aide to the head of the 902nd Military Intelligence Group (MIG) Colonel John Downie." Downie selected four members for an Alpha 184 Sniper Unit that was sent to Memphis to back up the primary assassin of MLK. Meanwhile, Ray, set up as the patsy, was able to move about freely since he was protected by the pseudonymous NSA clearance for Eric Galt.
  
• To refute the government's claim that Ray and his brother robbed the Alton, Illinois Bank to finance his travels and car purchase (therefore no Raul existed), Pepper "called the sheriff in Alton and the president of the bank; they gave the same statement. The Ray brothers had nothing to do with the robbery. No one from the HSCA, the FBI, or The New York Times had sought their opinion." CNN later reiterated the media falsehood that became part of the official false story.
  
• Pepper proves that the fatal shot came from the bushes behind Jim's Grill and the rooming house, not from the bathroom window. He presents overwhelming evidence for this, showing that the government's claim, based on the testimony on a severely drunk Charlie Stephens, was absurd. His evidence includes the testimony of numerous eyewitnesses and that of Loyd Jowers, the owner of Jim's Grill, who said he took the rifle from the shooter in the bushes and brought it into the bar where he hid it. Thus, Ray was not the assassin.
  
• He presents conclusive evidence that the bushes were cut down the morning after the assassination in an attempt to corrupt the crime scene. The order to do so came from Memphis Police Department Inspector Sam Evans to Maynard Stiles, a senior administrator of the Memphis Department of Public Works.
  
• He shows how King's room was moved from a safe interior room, 201, to balcony room, 306, on the upper floor; how King was conveniently positioned alone on the balcony by members of his own entourage for the easy mortal head shot from the bushes across the street. (Many people only remember the iconic photograph taken after-the-fact with Jesse Jackson, Andrew Young, et al., standing over the fallen King and pointing across the street.) Pepper implicates that Reverends Billy Kyles, Jesse Jackson, and, to a lesser extent, Ralph Abernathy were involved in these machinations. He uncovers of the role of black military intelligence agent Marrell McCollough, attached to the 111th MIG, within the entourage. McCollough can be seen kneeling over the fallen King, checking to see if he's dead.
  
• Pepper confirms that all of this, including the assassin in the bushes, was dutifully photographed by Army Intelligence agents situated on the nearby Fire House roof.
  
• He presents evidence that all security for Dr. King was withdrawn from the area by the Memphis Police Department, including a special security unit of black officers, and four tactical police units. A black detective at the nearby fire station, Ed Redditt, was withdrawn from his post on the afternoon of April 4th, allegedly because of a death threat against him. And the only two black firemen at Fire Station No.2 were transferred to another station.
  
• He names and confirms the presence of Alpha 184 snipers at locations high above the Lorraine Motel balcony.
  
• He explains the use of two white mustangs in the operation to frame Ray.
  
• He proves that Ray had driven off before the shooting; that Loyd Jowers took the rifle from the shooter who was in the bushes; that the Memphis police were working in close collaboration with the FBI, Army Intelligence, and the "Dixie Mafia," particularly local produce dealer Frank Liberto and his New Orleans associate Carlos Marcello; and that every aspect of the government's case was filled with holes that any person familiar with the details and possessing elementary logical abilities could refute.
  
• So importantly, Pepper shows how the mainstream media and government flacks have spent years covering up the truth of MLK's murder through lies and disinformation, just as they have done with the Kennedy and Malcom X assassinations that are of a piece with this one.
  

But since this is a book review and not a book, I will stop listing Pepper's very detailed and convincing findings. While he may not have answered every aspects of the case, and may be mistaken in some small details, he has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt the basic fact that James Earl Ray did not kill Martin Luther King, but that this great and dangerous leader was killed by a conspiracy organized at the highest levels of government.
The Plot to Kill King will mesmerize any reader seeking the truth about MLK's assassination. Even when Pepper, towards the end of the book, offers circumstantial and non-corroborated testimony from witnesses Ronnie Lee Adkins and Johnton Shelby, the reader can't help but be intrigued and to consider their stories highly plausible given all that Pepper has proven. Adkins claims that his father, a friend of Clyde Tolson, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover's deputy, and then he himself, were part of the plot to kill King. This involved politicians, the FBI, MPD, and mafia, including the aforementioned produce dealer Frank Liberto and others, making payoffs with FBI money to various people, including Jesse Jackson (whom Adkins, Jr. claims was a paid FBI informer) and working closely on the details of the assassination. Johton Shelby's story as recounted in his deposition (2014) to Pepper (reproduced, together with Adkins' (2009), as appendices in the book), is that his mother, who was working as an emergency room aide at St. Joseph's Hospital when King was brought there, inadvertently witnessed men spitting on Dr. King as he lay in the emergency room and a doctor putting a pillow over his head and suffocating him to death. Pepper tends to accept these accounts, but says he isn't completely convinced of all aspects of them. The reader is offered plenty of food for thought concerning these claims.
Besides clearly proving the government's part in killing Martin Luther King, this book is very important for the way Pepper links the case to those of JFK and RFK, who was murdered two months after King. At the center of all these murders is a trinity of men who were devoted to the ending the Vietnam War and all wars, restoring economic justice for all Americans, and eliminating racial inequality. That their goals were the same provides a motive for their murders by forces opposed to these lofty objectives. That their murders clearly involved highly sophisticated operations and cover-ups that could never have been pulled off by "crazed lone assassins" points to powerful forces with those means at their disposal. And when it comes to opportunity, when did the shadowy forces of the deep state ever lack for that?
The ramifications of the MLK assassination profoundly inform our current condition. For anyone who truly cares about peace, love, and justice, The Plot to Kill King is essential reading. William Pepper should be saluted. He has carried on Martin King's noble legacy.

EMPIRE OF CHAOS

"If we have to use force, it is because we are America; we are the indispensible nation."

U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright (1998)

"Since World War Two the United States has attempted to overthrow more than fifty foreign governments, it has dropped bombs on the people of around thirty countries, has attempted to assassinate some sixty foreign leaders, helped to suppress dozens of populist or nationalist movements, has tortured many thousands, and seriously and illegally intervened in one way or another in virtually every country on the planet, in the process of which the U.S. has caused the end of life for several million people, and condemned many millions more to a life of agony and despair."

William Blum, in a speech at the University of Vermont, 2007

"Coming to grips with U.S./CIA activities in broad numbers and figuring out how many people have been killed in the jungles of Laos or the hills of Nicaragua is very difficult. But, adding them up as best we can, we come up with a figure of six million people killed-and this is a minimum figure. Included are: one million killed in the Korean War, two million killed in the Vietnam War, 800,000 killed in Indonesia, one million in Cambodia, 20,000 killed in Angola ... and 22,000 killed in Nicaragua. These people would not have died if U.S. tax dollars had not been spent by the CIA to inflame tensions, finance covert political and military activities and destabilize societies."

John Stockwell, CIA official in the 1960s and 1970s

"The US spends almost half of all the military spending in the entire world, equal to virtually all the other countries combined. More than half of the weapons sold in the world are sold by the United States. The US has more than 700 military bases scattered across dozens of countries. The US is the world's leading trainer of paramilitaries. The US has a series of courses, from interrogators to generals, that have graduated military people guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity in dozens upon dozens of countries. The US has a series of covert paramilitary forces of its own that get almost no attention. This is the U.S. military machine. In addition, there's the support for repressive non-democratic governments and for governments that commit aggression. There are about forty of them that the US backs."

journalist Allan Nairn, 2010

"We are not hated because we practice democracy, value freedom, or uphold human rights. We are hated because our government denies these things to people in Third World countries whose resources are coveted by our multinational corporations."

Robert Bowman, Vietnam Veteran

"The crimes of the United States have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless, but very few people have actually talked about them. You have to hand it to America. It has exercised a cynical manipulation of power worldwide while masquerading as a force for universal good. It's a brilliant, even witty, highly successful act of hypnosis."

British playwright Harold Pinter, 2005 Nobel Lecture

"New military bases have been built since 9/11 in Poland, Lithuania, Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel, Kyrgyzstan, Qatar and Bahrain. The US military has 737 bases in 63 countries according to the 2005 Base Structure Report, but the actual number probably exceeds 1,000."

Eric Walberg, 2011

"About ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon, and went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me in. He said 'I just got this from upstairs [meaning the Secretary of Defense's office] today. This is a memo that describes how we're going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran'."

General Wesley Clark, 2007

"The real motivation behind US military interventions during the cold war was not Soviet deterrence, but the crushing of popular, indigenous nationalist movements for independence, and the establishment of US control over strategic regions."

Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed in his book "Behind the War on Terror"

"It is the function of the CIA to keep the world unstable, and to propagandize and teach the American people to hate, so we will let the Establishment spend any amount of money on arms."

John Stockwell, CIA official in the 1960s and 1970s

"This is a very hard choice, but we think the price is worth it."

U.S. Ambassador to the UN Madeleine Albright
on "60 Minutes" (1996), when she was asked whether she considered the deaths of half a million Iraqi children as the result of U.S. sanctions - acceptable

"Do American leaders really believe the utterances that emanate from their mouths? When the words "god" and "prayer" are regularly invoked in their talks, while American Hellfire missiles are sent screaming into a city center or a village marketplace teeming with life ...when they carry on endlessly about democracy and freedom, while American soldiers are smashing down doors, dragging off the men, humiliating the women, traumatizing the children. When they proclaim the liberation of a people and the bringing forth of a better life, while vast quantities of American depleted uranium are exploding into a fine vapor which will poison the air, the soil, the blood, and the genes forever."

William Blum

"Stop talking so much about democracy and instead support dictatorships of the right if their policies are pro-American."

U.S. Treasury Secretary George Humphrey, 1954

"Almost from the beginning, the CIA engaged not only in the collection of intelligence information, but also in covert operations which involved rigging elections and manipulating labor unions abroad, carrying on paramilitary operations, overturning governments, assassinating foreign officials, protecting former Nazis and lying to Congress."

former Senator George McGovern, 1987

"In every country, embassies are used for spying. So, it would be dumb for a country to put its real intelligence-gathering officers inside an embassy or consulate or attaché', because that is the first place a hosting nation is going to look for spies. So, the number one place the United States and other countries place their intelligence-gathering officers and informants is NGOs. In Russia, Central Asia, the Caucasus, and elsewhere in the world, United States' NGOs - over 90% of them - are operations bases for the CIA."

Sibel Edmonds

"With the end of the Cold War and the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact in 1991, NATO's real role in the US empire has become clearer as, instead of disbanding, it expanded to encompass, in conjunction with US military commands, most of the world. It has become the centerpiece of the empire's military presence around the world, moving quickly to respond to US needs to intervene where the UN won't."

Eric Walberg, 2011

Up at Kennedys and King, one of our best reviewers critiques the Gayle Nix Jackson book, Pieces of the Puzzle and gives it a Thumbs Up which is rare these days.

https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kenne...ology-2017

"SO ONLY THE CONSPIRACY SPEAKS!" by Bill Kelly


"So only the conspiracy speaks!" Control of Communications and Media at Dealey Plaza

As Edward Lutwak details in his book "Coup d'etat A Practical Handbook," one of the vital and necessary requirements of a successful coup is the monitoring and control of communications, which if applicable to what happened at Dealey Plaza, requires those responsible for the president's murder to also be wired to the instantaneous electronic reports going to and from the major players on the board.


That certainly limits the suspects as we already know what communications there were and who monitored and controlled them primarily sideband radios, telephone calls, radio broadcasts, wire service ticker tapes and television. Who had the capability to monitor and control them? Very few people who we can identify and consider as persons of interests or suspects.


Communications is a key element in any covert intelligence operation, as Colonel Claus von Staufenberg considered when he sat down at his desk and devised the plan to kill Hitler that materialized on July 20, 1944.


Von Saufenberg was from a long line of German military men, many of whom were not Nazis but were just continuing their calling as professional soldiers, like their fathers before them, and they were horrified that rather than acknowledge defeat on reasonable terms, Hitler was going to allow Germany to be totally destroyed.


With the backing of a number of high ranking generals, after a few failed attempts, the assignment to kill Hitler was passed to Colonel Claus von Staufenberg, who was seriously wounded in Africa fighting with Rommel, and was given the task as he was a trusted aide to Hitler.


Hitler had been impressed with von Staufenberg and signed the executive order he had devised to secure major government and media buildings in time of national emergency von Staufenberg's example was the possible rebellion of the millions of slave laborors. In such a case Operation Valkyrie would call out the Home Guard military units to secure the key centers of government, transportation and communication especially newspapers and radio stations.


Hitler signed the order, and asked von Staufenberg to join him and his generals for their military briefings at the Wolf's Lair headquarters, near Rastenberg.


What von Staufenberg didn't tell Hitler was that the sudden death of the Fuher would be considered one of the emergencies that would trigger Operation Valkyrie, and that was part of the plan.


When von Staufenberg sat down to compose the details of the plan, he included the role of the Home Guard soldiers in seizing key buildings, especially the media newspapers and radio stations, concluding with, "So only the conspiracy speaks!"


Unfortunately, after von Staufenberg set the fuse, planted the briefcase bomb under the briefing table next to Hitler, and left the building, it exploded, and the conspirators announced that Hitler was dead, but he survived. And when his voice was heard on the radio, the game was up, and instead of seizing the key buildings, the co-conspirators were rounded up by Colonel Otto Skorzeny and other loyal officers. Some, like von Staufenberg, were shot immediately, and eventually over 3,000 people were arrested.


But a few got away, including Hans Bernd Gisivious, a Gestopo officer who met Allen Dulles, the OSS man in Bern, Switzerland, agreeing to become Dulles' agent. Gisivious kept Dulles informed of the plot by dissident military officers, though both Dulles and Gisivious were weary of von Staufenberg's plan to use a bomb instead of just shooting Hitler.


After hearing Hitler on the radio, and realizing the plan failed to kill him, Gisivious escaped Berlin and stayed in the home of some friends until Dulles could get him a fake passport, papers and a train ticket to Switzerland. After the war Gisivious testified against some of the Nazis at Nurenburg and Dulles arranged for him to come to the United States in a sort of Project Paperclip arrangement, where Gisivious would use his unique talents in support of the government, and got him a good executive level job with a Texas defense contractor.


On July 20, 1954 the tenth anniversary of the failed assassination attempt on Hitler, Gisivious had dinner with Dulles, then director of the CIA.


In September 1963, when the CIA was engaged in a detailed study of the Valkyrie plot to kill Hitler, in order to develop a plan to be used against Fidel Castro, the CIA had easy access to direct participants including Gisivious, Dulles, Dulles' associate Mary Bancroft, who was in the thick of the Valkyrie plot, and Skorzeny, the counter-coup commando commander.


While the CIA did try to recruit a number of dissident Cuban military officers including Dr. Rolando Cubella (AMLASH), whose Veradero apartment was considered as a staging area for CIA trained snipers to shoot Castro as he rode by in an open jeep.


But instead of Castro getting shot, it was President Kennedy who was shot in the head as he rode along in an open Lincoln convertible, as the Valkyrie-like plan the CIA had devised had been redirected to JFK in Dallas.


There are a number of strategic aspects of von Staufenberg's Valkyrie plan that were adapted for use against Castro then redirected to JFK in Dallas, including using standard covert operational procedures, getting the victim to sign off on the plan, utilizing the Home (National) Guard/Army Reserves to carry out the operation, monitoring and controlling the communications and blaming communists for the assassination itself. The only aspect not used was the mechanism of death instead of a bomb it was a first class trained and equipped sniper with a high powered rifle.


While each of those aspects will be reviewed in detail, this concerns the monitoring and control of the communications.


THE COMMUNICATIONS IN DALLAS


There were numerous radios in Dealey Plaza, as every police car and motorcycle were equipped with radios that allowed them to communicate to and from their headquarters at City Hall, on two different channels.


Then there was the radios in the motorcade every car had one tuned to a special channel that was operated by the White House Communications Agency (WHCA) officers in a suite of rooms in the Dallas Sherritan Hotel, where the Secret Service, George H.W. Bush and his wife also had rooms.


The motorcade radios on special WHCA motorcade frequency were located in the pilot car a half mile ahead of the motorcade, the lead Secret Service car, the Lincoln limo, the SS followup car (they called The Queen Mary), and the car the Vice President was riding. Besides the radio in the front seat, LBJ had his own portable walkie-talkie like radio that he listened to as he hunkered down on the floor of the car with a SS agent on top of him.


While both Dallas police channels were recorded on a dictabelt machine, and their acoustics forensically analyzed by the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) specialists, (and they concluded four shots were recorded), the WHCA claims their motorcade frequency broadcasts were not recorded, or at least the tape no longer exists.


We know some of what was on that recording because of what listeners heard, including Air Force One pilot James Swindell, who instead of going to lunch with his crew, he stayed behind in the cockpit and listened to the WHCA motorcade channel, hearing Secret Service agent Kellerman's frantic voice that clearly indicated something was wrong.


In fact, Kellerman was on the radio, finger pressing against the button that allowed him to talk, when the fatal head shot was fired, so that would certainly be on the tape of that channel, if it was recorded, as it should have been.


Besides the WHCA base station set up at the Sheraton Hotel, the radios in the motorcade and Air Force One, there was another base station that could have monitored the radio communications at the Dallas Emergency Response Center in the basement bunker under the Science Museum at the Dallas Fairgrounds. That was controlled by Colonel Jack Crichton, the head of the 488[SUP]th[/SUP] US Army Reserves Intelligence unit, who was at the time of the assassination, was at a meeting at the Adolophis Hotel, just across the street from Jack Ruby's Carousel Club.


Some of the Dallas Emergency Response Center's records have been located, and they will be checked to see if the communications center was active on the day of the assassination, but it isn't just the ability to monitor communications that matters, it's the capability to control them.


The WHCA radios, the radios in the motorcade and the radios on Air Force One, the Vice President's plane, the cabinet plane then over the Pacific ocean on the way to Japan, were all on the same circuit one under the control of the manufacturer Collins Radio, of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, where the main relay station was located and known as "Liberty" station, as it is referred to on the extant Air Force One recordings we do have.


Art Collins got his start in the radio business as a teenage HAM radio buff who built his own short wave radio, the only one capable of picking up the remote broadcasts from Admiral Byrd from his artic expeditions. The military didn't forget that as Collins got major military contracts during World War II, and Art Collins became close personal friends with Air Force General Curtis LeMay, a HAM radio buff himself.
Admiral Byrd himself was cousin of D. H. Byrd, owner of the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD), from where a sixth floor sniper shot from during the assassination operation.


Collins Radio also had a station at their hanger at Redbird Airport in Oak Cliff from where their executives would fly to Cedar Rapids or Washington D.C. The Collins Radio station at Redbird was probably capable of monitoring all of the radio frequencies being used.


Art Collins was a founder and director of the Graduate Research Center of the Southwest (GRCS) that President Kennedy would have mentioned in his opening remarks at the Trade Center if he was permitted to live to deliver his speech. As the GRCS was to be the recipient of an award at that event, it is likely that Art Collins was in the audience awaiting the President, who would never arrive.


Collins' radios were in each key car in the motorcade, at the WHCA makeshift base station at the Dallas Sheraton hotel, the Dallas Police HQ at City Hall and possibly the DPD Special Services Unit at the Fairgrounds, the Emergency Management command and control center bunker below the Science Museum at the Fairgrounds, (two, possibly three) radios aboard Air Force One, the VP plane, the cargo plane for the cars, a base station set up in the Secret Service offices in the Executive Office building, and at Parkland, where a WHCA officer commandeered the wall pay phones and established a secure ground link to all of the above.


Other government officers and reporters used Parkland office desk phones to make calls.


After the three radio channels being used by the Dallas police and WHCA in the motorcade, telephones were the second means of communicating the news first that the President had been shot, and second that he was dead.


One media car in the motorcade only had one radio-phone, that one reporter called in the fact the motorcade had been fired on, then broke the line so the other reporters in the car couldn't use it.
One reporter ran into the TSBD and asked for a phone and another got to a wall phone at Parkland hospital before the WHCA officer commandeered them.


AP and UPI wire service reporters called their Dallas offices where seasoned reporters knew to push the FLASH BREAKING NEWS button that shut down all other incoming news to give the breaking news priority and five bells went off in radio news desks around the world indicating that an extremely important message was to be broadcast and to turn on their large reel to reel tape recorders.


Aboard Air Force One, unknown to President Johnson, JFK had ordered that the radio transmissions from the plane be recorded when the plane was in the air. When Johnson arrived at Love Field, he made the first major decision of his Presidency by going aboard Air Force One instead of the plane he flew in on, reportedly because it had superior communications equipment.


Aboard Air Force One, but before it was airborne, LBJ made three known phone calls that were not recorded because the plane had not yet taken off. One call was to his local Dallas corporate attorney, J. Waddy Bullion. Another attorney in the same law office listened in and said that LBJ asked Bullion about having to sell his Haliburton stock."


The second call was to attorney general RFK at his Hickory Hill home in Virginia. LBJ asked RFK if he should take the oath of office immediately or wait until he got back to Washington, and the answer was immediately. LBJ asked for the wording to the oath of office and RFK said he would get back to him.
LBJ then called Judge Sarah Hughes, who he had recommended appointment as a Federal Judge, and told her to come immediately to Love Field to administer the oath.


Bobby then called back with the wording to the oath of office, that LBJ's secretary transcribed.
Since the AF1 air conditioning, like the tape recorders, didn't function unless the plane was moving, it was hot and stuffy in the plane's cabin as they waited for Judge Hughes. She administered the oath, not on a bible, but a Catholic mass missile that his parish priest had given JFK.


Once in the air the Air Force One radio communications were recorded by the WHCA, and possibly by Collins Radio relay station in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, the Dallas Emergency center, and most certainly by the Cubans from their Veradero listening post the Soviets had given them. One of the Cubans who had worked there, and later defected, told his CIA debriefers that Fidel Castro himself had ordered them to listen for news of the President in Texas. While Brian Latell and other CIA propagandists use this fact as evidence of Castro's foreknowledge and responsibility for the assassination, it really only indicates he knew JFK would be in Texas.


Aboard the cabinet plane over the Pacific enroute to Japan, an assistant press secretary read the wire service ticker that the President was shot, and took it to the senior cabinet officer on the plane Secretary of State Dean Rusk, who shared it with Press Secretary Pierre Salinger.


Salinger detailed these facts in his book "On Orders of My President."


Salinger says he then went to the radio shack on the plane and contacted the White House where he requested the Situation Room. Salinger, using his code name talked to WHCA officer Maj. Patterson, using his code name "Stranger." Stranger informed Salinter that the President was dead and for them to turn around and return to Washington immediately.


Rusk was incredulous. He wasn't going to take orders from someone named "Stranger," and asked who "Stranger" was.


Salinger went to the pilot and requested the code book from the plane's safe, as seen in the film "Dr. Strangelove, or How I Learned to Love the Bomb," but the code book wasn't there. It was missing.
Rusk then ordered Salinger to break security and request the name of "Stranger," and the answer came back Major Patterson, the WHCA officer who Salinger personally knew and vouched for him.


The cabinet plane then turned around and landed in Hawaii to refuel, where only the Secretary of State de-boarded so he could use a secure land line to call the White House Situation Room to get further details, and to learn whether they should go to Dallas, as Salinger wanted to do, or go direct to Washington. The answer was clear the President's body was in the air aboard Air Force One and was no longer in Dallas so the cabinet party and plane should go directly to DC.


The Air Force One radio transmissions were recorded by the WHCA, and at least two different transcripts were made one of the original unedited tape, and another of an edited tape. We know this because William Manchester, author of "Death of a President," was allowed to read the unedited transcript, and he quotes portions of it in his book, portions that are not on the edited transcripts or either of the edited tapes we now have.


In addition, Pierre Salinger was given a copy of the transcript that he quotes from in his book, but those portions of the transcript are not on the edited tapes and transcripts we now have. Salinger said he returned the transcript to the Kennedy Presidential library, but they no longer have it.


Like the cabinet plane's code book, the original unedited tapes and Salinger's transcript went missing from the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) custody.


Back in Washington, Sen. Ted Kennedy reported that all of the phone lines in Washington were down, as he was running around trying to find a telephone that worked.


Air Force One landed at Andrews Air Force Base. An Air Force plane was bringing General LeMay to Washington from Michigan while the cabinet plane was also flying back to Andrews.


President Johnson was one of the last to deplane. On the runway he conferred with Assistant Secretary of State Ball, and the military, read a short statement for the TV cameras and radio, and walked to a helicopter to fly to the White House lawn.


Johnson and his staff of four walked past the Oval Office, but passed its French doors at the Rose Garden and continued on to the Executive Office Building (EOB) next door. There LBJ retreated into his inner office with two of his top aides and made a series of telephone calls, most of whose names were noted by secretaries. Although the Oval Office telephone conversations in the White House were recorded, none of LBJ's phone calls from the EOB were recorded.


From the recipients however, we know that one of the calls went to the Texas State Attorney General, with President Johnson ordering the Texans NOT to charge Oswald with conspiracy or more precisely "furthering a communist conspiracy," something the radio news had reported.


And indeed, David Atlee Phillips' CIA asset Joseph Goulden, the Washington correspondent for the Philadelphia Inquirer, had been on the phone with Assistant District Attorney William Alexander, asking him about charging Oswald with "furthering a communist conspiracy," the origin of that rumor.


After receiving the call from LBJ, Barefoot Sanders called District Attorney Henry Wade, tracking him down having dinner at a Dallas restaurant, and told him about the order from the White House about the "communist conspiracy" charge, and Wade went back to his office where he confronted Alexander, ordering him NOT to charge Oswald with conspiracy.


From the EOB, LBJ then went to his home, the Elms, where he made some phone calls while the WHCA and Secret Service set up secure land line telephone lines.


At the end of the day, we know that the tape of Secret Service security channel for the motorcade is missing, as well as the original unedited Air Force One radio transmission tapes, the transcripts of the unedited tape that both Manchester and Salinger had quoted from, and the cabinet plane's code book was missing. That's a lot of missing records that could fill in the missing pieces to the puzzle.


I believe the original unedited Air Force One radio tapes still exist, and like the tapes General Clifton kept in his personal possession, others kept copies of these tapes as well, and one day, they will surface. In addition independent tapes could have been made by the amateur HAM radio clubs, or even the Cubans at Veradero, as the side band radio transmissions could have been picked up by anyone with a radio and the frequencies being used.


So far, everything we've heard about the lone assassin and Castro communist conspiracy being behind the assassination, that is "the conspiracy speaking." Now it's time for the truth to speak.

Someone I had the pleasure to meet and talk to several times.......

He got some big names to sign on to this. Hopefully it will get some media exposure.

There will be a page soon for people to sign on to it.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1P1YE...m7kDg/edit