John Lennon would be 70 today

[Albert Doyle]

Chapman's hypnotizers made one critical mistake. They exposed themselves by using the same line they used against Martin Luther King junior when they spooked him. When MLK was spooked by Hoover and the FBI they did psychological warfare against him by trying to convince him, by means of anonymous letters and phone calls, that he was a hypocrite for having extra-marital affairs. They thought they could use this as a psychological lever against King's christian conscience and either make him commit suicide or force him to back-off.

If you look at Mark David Chapman's statements he often referred to what motivated him to kill Lennon as being the anger he felt over Lennon's alleged hypocrisy for singing about renouncing the material world and then turning around and living a millionaire's life at the Dakota. If you analyze this logic it is in perfect dovetail with the logic used against MLK by FBI. So much so that it is an indication of where that logic originated from.

The reason this motivation made it to the surface and was articulated by Chapman, unlike his unarticulated reference to 'Catcher In The Rye', is because MDC probably believed this on his own. I suspect part of the reason why Chapman was chosen as the Manchurian Candidate was because he was a genuine southern christian with genuine beliefs while in the YMCA (His YMCA having CIA recruitment connections). He probably made the mistake of speaking openly about Lennon's "bigger than Christ" statement and his hypocrisy for leading a rich man's life in front of the wrong people. These CIA-connected recruiters then profiled Chapman and realized they had a perfect Lone Nut candidate who was already of the mind-set necessary to serve as a patsy. He was a person who had already publicly revealed himself as being critical on a moral basis of Lennon. This is something that was just too perfect for their purposes to not use to their advantage. The unconscious kill orders would have a conscious backer and logical escort in the form of Chapman's already spoken-of discontent with Lennon.

The spooks were foolish to think their already-used psy-ops tool against Martin Luther King junior wouldn't show through and be visible for what it was and where it came from. But, like I've written above, these people WANTED people to realize where it came from and who was enforcing their political rule with Manchurian Candidate executions.

If you don't believe me then consider Mark David Chapman, a good old southern Christian boy, had a sudden interest in art collecting out of the blue when his strange obsessive "mental illness" showed up in Hawaii. Of the two unexplained revenue expenditures in Hawaii one was world travel costing thousands of dollars, the other was art collection. Mark David Chapman was a security guard on a security guard's income. I believe his sudden interest in art was part of a CIA plan to have Chapman interface with Lennon through art collecting - something Lennon was known to do with Yoko. CIA and FBI study their targets and their interests. I think the art collection plot was one option that was eventually dropped in favor of having a limousine not show-up. The side-walk encounter was something much more explainable and less likely to draw suspicion.

I hope people are smart enough to see these deep bloody footprints leading back to intel...

[Albert Doyle]

The 30th anniversary is coming up. FOX News did a special on Lennon's assassination giving the official story.



Interesting that the arresting officers were all interviewed. They said Chapman seemed unusually calm and casual for someone who had just shot someone. They also said his first words to them were "I acted alone". Chapman was quoted as saying he beat the battle between good and evil inside him when he quit his first attempt to kill Lennon. All signs of mind programming or hypnosis. The "I acted alone" was pre-emptive establishment of the Lone Nut.


FOX didn't mention anything about suspicions of Manchurian Candidate programming.

[Dawn Meredith]

The 30th anniversary is coming up. FOX News did a special on Lennon's assassination giving the official story.



Interesting that the arresting officers were all interviewed. They said Chapman seemed unusually calm and casual for someone who had just shot someone. They also said his first words to them were "I acted alone". Chapman was quoted as saying he beat the battle between good and evil inside him when he quit his first attempt to kill Lennon. All signs of mind programming or hypnosis. The "I acted alone" was pre-emptive establishment of the Lone Nut.


FOX didn't mention anything about suspicions of Manchurian Candidate programming.

WOW! Thirty years. Now that makes me feel old. Does time go faster the older you get or does it merely appear this way? I suspect there will be a lot on tv then- all of it lies.

Being a huge Beatles and Lennon supporter I followed the case closely from the start but I believe this may be the first time I have seen that he used those words. "I acted alone". How telling. I wonder what MDC would say today. He does not give interviews or respond to mail.

Several friends of mine are of the opinion that Obama utilized a type of hypnosis to get so many to vote for him.

Dawn

[Keith Millea]

Several friends of mine are of the opinion that Obama utilized a type of hypnosis to get so many to vote for him.

No,we were just "punked"

[Peter Presland]

WOW! Thirty years. Now that makes me feel old. Does time go faster the older you get or does it merely appear this way? I suspect there will be a lot on tv then- all of it lies.

Here's my theory on the passage of time thingy FWIW:

For a 15 year old 15 years is a lifetime (to date)

For a 30 year old the previous 15 years is 50% of life to date.
For a 60 year old the same 15 years is a mere 25%. Hence it appears to have passed in half the time.

IOW the older you get the smaller any time increment, as a proportion of life already lived, becomes. The perception therefore is indeed of the passage of time accelerating.

Simple really - appearances can be so deceptive eh?

[Ed Jewett]

Was John Lennon's murderer Mark Chapman a CIA hitman? Thirty years on, there's an extraordinary new theory



By Tony Rennell
Last updated at 1:36 AM on 4th December 2010

• Comments (56)
  
• Add to My Stories
  

For many baby-boomers whose formative years coincided with the Swinging Sixties, a mild Monday in early December 1980 will always be remembered as the day the music died.
In New York, the enigmatic, charismatic - and frankly often loony - ex-Beatle John Lennon staggered into the entrance hall of the Dakota, the exclusive parkside mansion block that had been his home for nearly eight years.
The cassettes of a new song the 40-year-old had just recorded, called Walking On Thin Ice, clattered to the floor as he collapsed - blood flowing from four gunshot wounds.

Autograph hunter Mark Chapman gets a signature from John Lennon outside his elegant Dakota apartment building in New York where hours later he gunned down the former Beatle



Lethal: Mark Chapman as played by Jonas Ball in The Killing of John Lennon

Lennon had been heading home late from work and was hoping to catch his five-year-old son, Sean, before he went to bed.

He and Yoko Ono, his wife and musical collaborator, had been dropped by their white limousine on the pavement outside the building rather than driving through the gates and into the building’s secure courtyard.

Yoko hurried on ahead, nodding blankly at a stranger in the shadows — there were always fans and hangers-on lurking outside the Dakota for a glimpse of their hero.

Her husband trudged behind and had taken three or four strides when a voice called out: ‘Mr Lennon?’

The star slowed and then turned to look. Instantly, he registered that he’d seen this man a few times lately — and, earlier that day, had even autographed an LP cover for him.

But now the stranger had a different purpose. He was down on one knee in a combat stance, a .38 revolver clasped in his hands.

Five shots rang out and four dum-dum bullets, specially adapted to cause maximum physical damage, slammed into Lennon’s back, side and shoulder.

The musician got as far as the lobby before blurting out: ‘I’m shot! I’m shot!’ He was dead on arrival at hospital a quarter of an hour later.





Then and now: John Lennon's killer Mark Chapman told police: 'I acted alone. Lennon had to die'


Meanwhile, the killer, pudgy 25-year-old Mark Chapman, stood quietly at the scene. On the ground lay the smoking gun he had let fall from his hands, beside Lennon’s blood-stained glasses.

Leaning nonchalantly against the wall of the Dakota, Chapman then began flicking through a copy of Catcher In The Rye, J.D. Salinger’s famous novel of adolescent alienation, whose central character was apparently the inspiration for what he had just done.

When the cops arrived, he made no attempt to escape. As his hands were cuffed and he was bundled into a squad car, he explained: ‘I acted alone.’ At precinct headquarters, he told detectives: ‘Lennon had to die.’

To a world shocked by Lennon’s violent and seemingly pointless death, it became clear that Chapman was a delusional nerd. He took drugs and was psychologically disturbed.

Bullied at school, he sought refuge in an imaginary world where he exercised power over other people.

A rootless adult who never settled into a proper job, he found solace for his empty life in the music of The Beatles. A loner himself, he identified with the reclusive side of Lennon’s insecure, mixed-up personality.

But revelations of Lennon’s vast wealth and burgeoning business empire turned Chapman’s hero-worship on its head.

He felt betrayed, personally insulted. He stalked and shot his erstwhile hero out of a weird sense of retribution — coupled with a desire to be famous for something.

John and Yoko: She has always fought the release of her husband's killer

So the story went. But, with the 30th anniversary of Lennon’s death next week, a theory has resurfaced that challenges this long-held conventional view.

Though seemingly far-fetched, if true it would startle and appal the millions of fans who still idolise Lennon.

In a new book, author Phil Strongman claims that Chapman was a stooge. Lennon’s real assassin was the CIA — at the behest of Right-wing fanatics in the American political establishment.

He gets to this controversial conclusion by contesting many of the so-called ‘facts’ about the case — including the basic assumption that Chapman was a Beatles and Lennon fan.

Strongman writes that, until the weekend before the killing: ‘Chapman, the supposed Lennon “obsessive” and “fan of fans”, did not own one Lennon single, book or album. Not one. Some “fan”, some “obsession”.’

He dismisses the often-made claim that Chapman had 14 hours of tapes of Lennon’s songs in his rucksack on the day of the shooting. ‘They have never been photographed or produced for the simple reason that they do not exist.’

So Chapman wasn’t just a celebrity stalker who went too far. Nor, says Strongman, did he kill Lennon for 15 minutes of fame.

‘If he was an attention-seeker, then why did he turn down the chance of what would have been the trial of the century? By pleading guilty, Chapman missed all of this attention he was supposedly seeking. Why?’

Lennon released this picture of his autographed Double Fantasy album cover hours before he was shot dead by Mark Chapman

Lennon's autograph on the Double Fantasy album

It is the killer’s calmness after the shooting that Strongman sees as the key to what really happened, providing evidence for his theory that Lennon’s death was a state-sponsored conspiracy.

If Chapman looked like a zombie, as he hung around after the killing and waited for the police, it was because that was exactly what he was.

Chapman, he suggests, had been recruited by the CIA and trained by them during his travels round the world, when he mysteriously pitched up in unlikely places for a boy from Georgia.

How strange, for example, that Chapman should visit Beirut at a time when the Lebanese capital was a hive of CIA activity — and was said to be home to one of the agency’s top-secret assassination training camps. Another camp
was supposedly in Hawaii, where Chapman lived for a number of years.

And who funded the penniless young man’s round-the-world trip in 1975, which took in Japan, the UK, India, Nepal, Korea, Vietnam and China?
Money never seemed to be a problem for Chapman, but no one has ever explained where it came from. The distinct possibility remains, in Strongman’s opinion, that the secret service was his paymaster.

And somewhere along the line his mind was infiltrated. With Chapman, the CIA could have drawn on its long experience of using mind-controlling drugs and techniques such as hypnosis to produce assassins who would eliminate trouble-makers, and ‘patsies’, the fall guys on whom such killings could be blamed.

Strongman claims: ‘Catcher In The Rye was part of Chapman’s hypnotic programming, a trigger that could be “fired” at him by a few simple keywords [via] a
cassette tape message, telex or telegram or even a mere telephone call.
’It’s certainly true that conspiracy theorists have long suspected both the Americans and their communist foes of using such techniques to activate ‘sleeper’ assassins — as fictionalised in the film The Manchurian Candidate.

The author is uncertain whether Chapman fell into the category of unwitting killer or unwitting accomplice.
But his deep suspicion is that Chapman did not act alone — any more, he says, than Lee Harvey Oswald did in the murder of JFK in Dallas or Sirhan Sirhan in Bobby Kennedy’s death. He even doubts if Chapman fired the fatal shots.

‘The bullets slapped into Lennon’s body so closely together that pathologists later had trouble marking out the different entry points. If all of these shots came from Chapman, it was a miraculous piece of shooting.
'Put simply, the authorities' investigation, or lack of it, into the assassination was shockingly slack and beggars belief.'



‘In fact, if any of them came from him it was miraculous because Chapman was standing on Lennon’s right and, as the autopsy report and death certificate later made clear, all Lennon’s wounds were in the left side of his body.’

There had to be another shooter involved, Strongman insists. He suggests that a CIA plant who worked at the Dakota building was the real killer.

What increases his suspicion is the cursory nature of the police investigation after Chapman’s arrest.

‘His bizarre post-killing calm was not questioned, his behaviour was not checked with a drugs test, his “programmed” state [a word used about him by more than one police officer] was not investigated, his previous movements were not thoroughly looked into.

‘Put simply, the authorities’ investigation, or lack or it, into the assassination was shockingly slack and beggars belief.’
It had to be, he concludes, that the FBI were conspiring with the CIA to cover up the reality — that shadowy figures in the American establishment ordered Lennon’s assassination.
But why was Lennon on their hit list? He had, it seems, rattled the cages of America’s powerful Right wing, first with his opposition to the Vietnam War and then with his campaign of pacifism.

It is here that those of us who lived through the period must pause for breath. Lennon was a mad and maddening genius, a showman and a show-off. But he was a dreamer, not a doer.
He wrote songs, he played the guitar, he had some funny ideas. He made us laugh. He was irreverent.

But he wasn’t about to bring down capitalism. He was doing much too well out of it himself for that. Grumbling to an aide one day about soaring business expenses, he was reminded: ‘Imagine no possessions, John.’ Lennon shot back: ‘It’s only a bloody song!’

Still, the fact that some of the files relating to secret service investigations into Lennon’s activities remain closed continue to fuel suspicions of a cover-up.

Strongman writes: ‘I am as convinced as any human being can be that elements of both the FBI and CIA were undoubtedly behind a cover-up in December 1980. They were also deeply involved in the killing itself.’
'I felt that by killing him I would become somebody and, instead of that, I became a murderer and murderers are not somebodies.'


Meanwhile, Chapman — crazy stalker or robot assassin — lives on. Strangely, if Strongman’s theory is true, he has managed to survive three decades in one of America’s most violent prisons despite the dangerous information he must still possess.

He remains in Attica, 30 years into his life sentence and well beyond the 20-year minimum decreed by the judge who sentenced him.

When asked by a parole board in 2006 to explain why he murdered Lennon, Chapman said: ‘The result would be that I would be famous . . . I would receive a tremendous amount of attention, which I did receive.’

Earlier this year, he told another parole board that back in 1980 he had a long list of potential targets, which included Liz Taylor, chat-show host Johnnie Carson and Paul McCartney.
‘They were famous, that was it,’ he said, and by killing them he would achieve ‘instant notoriety’.

He hit on Lennon, he explained, only because the Dakota was easy to get at. ‘I felt that by killing him I would become somebody and, instead of that, I became a murderer, and murderers are not somebodies. Instead of taking my life I took somebody else’s, which was unfortunate.’

In 2006, his fourth application for release — opposed as it has always been by Yoko Ono — was refused, as it was again in 2008 and once more this year. He is eligible to try again in 2012.

John Lennon — Life, Times And Assassination, by Phil Strongman from The Bluecoat Press at £8.99. To order a copy (p&p free), call 0845 155 0720.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...z17D0pBtIP

[Albert Doyle]

I hope he's developed new material over what Bresler already provided.

[Albert Doyle]

Lennon was about to beat the US Government by gaining citizenship and therefore Constitutional protections. The timing of Lennon's murder showed a need to prevent Lennon from gaining this victory. CIA gave themselves away because if you know anything about CIA it justifies its doings on a legal basis. You might think that the killing of Lennon was an outrage and insanity and could never be justified legally, however if you study CIA you'll find they operate according to a legal framework in what they do. Part of the reason they do what they do is because they have a perverse sense of legal right. When Lennon was shot before he could gain his citizenship he was still technically a foreign threat. If you look at Lennon's FBI file he was labeled a "Trotsky-ite" subversive. So while the public uses the craziness of the suggestion that CIA would kill someone as beloved and harmless as the mop-top Beatle John Lennon as reason to reject the idea, it doesn't understand that CIA is a very sterile organization that operates under a cold notion of national security. The general public isn't informed that John Lennon existed under some very serious intel categories that would make him eligible for executive action in order to eliminate a threat to national security. If you study CIA's decapitation operations overseas they very simply murdered people whom they considered harmful to the objectives of the United States. While John Lennon was in New York and well known and famous, without citizenship he was safely within the known definitions of a foreign threat to the US Government. The timing of Lennon's murder tells you a lot about who did it, as does the method. John Lennon's assassination was simply a CIA decapitation operation - only it was domestic. If you study CIA decapitation assassinations they have the psychological warfare benefit of not only stopping the movement but showing those who follow it what will happen to them. Don't think for a moment those who killed Lennon are worried about you knowing it. They want you to know it. You are looking at the work of a group that justifies its actions by means of "plausible deniability". The modus operandi is clearly that of defending national security with military law. John Lennon was killed because he fell under an available opportunity to define him as a threat and take-advantage of the legality of being able to covertly justify his murder. Like I said above the strategic sterility and procedure usually followed by the group that killed him is showing through like an obvious framework here. These people neutralize threats according to some very cold and evil rules. The covert vector by which Lennon was assassinated is showing through like the dog that ate the chicken off the table.

In effect the best form of plausible deniability is a disturbed Lone Nut with psychotic explanations for their act. The advantage CIA has in doing this is their technical capability keeps them outside normal means of evidence. In effect this pattern is telling you exactly who did it, how, and why. What you are looking at is cold enforcement of military law. The evil that Lennon was fighting saw him as a threat and killed him - just like Kennedy. This invisible power was so drunk on its ability to murder with impunity it then targeted even Reagan himself because they couldn't resist the perfect parlay of putting ex-CIA director George Bush into power. This was an irresistible opportunity for them that would serve their reassertion of power agenda. The fact they got away with Lennon's assassination so easily and without any resistance emboldened them to doing the same with Reagan. When you put this all in correct perspective you then understand the unspeakable evil involved and how necessary it is to shine what they can't stand the most on their evil doings - sunlight. Good clean pure democratic sunlight, like it was designed for.


.

[Albert Doyle]

CNN did an anniversary piece on Hinckley's shooting of Reagan last night. Of course, like their Lennon anniversary piece, they never mentioned anything about mind control hypnosis.

What I got the most from the program was CIA probably studied their Kennedy Assassination and tweaked their Lone Nut process in order to increase the appearance of guilt in their patsies. What I saw in the CNN piece is that CIA looked at the flaws in their framing of Oswald and refined them by making sure Hinckley was seen as definitely being psychotic in his delusional love affair with Jody Foster. Few people who watch the CNN piece are probably aware that they are seeing a very evil and diabolical CIA program in making Hinckley appear as a dangerous Lone Nut. Once Hinckley was induced by mind control to act out on his imaginary love affair with Foster he would successfully create a paper trail to convince the public he was a dangerous psychotic. In my mind this was a process his mind control think tank handlers developed in order to compensate for failures in the Lee Harvey Oswald Lone Nut scenario.

In the case of Chapman, CIA's refinement of their patsy framing technique came in the form of open claims of imaginary meanings in the book 'Catcher In The Rye'. This was yet another creepy spook adjustment of their mind control Manchurian Candidate process after studying their successes and failures in the Kennedy Assassination. Some of the best 'evidence' for these CIA hypnotic assassin programs is looking at how the nuances of each case conform to the overall pattern of such operations. There's no doubt CIA continued using this method because of its functional success in the famous assassinations of the 1960's. When you apply the pattern of progressive development of the technique in the Chapman and Hinckley cases it fits perfectly. They removed the doubts by placing their assassin right up front without any co-conspirators. They also created less doubt of their guilt by enhancing the psychotic nature of their motives. In my opinion you are looking at the progressive development of the technique in this pattern.

[Albert Doyle]

John Lennon Life, Times & Assassination - Phil Strongman



Strongman attempts something very similar to what James Douglass does in his book 'JFK And The Unspeakable' by intermixing the full background of covert agency history and political influence with Lennon and his life. By doing this Strongman reveals an unseen perspective to Lennon's assassination never before seen in this exact context. The book is effective in showing how corrupted media coverage has failed to inform the public of the greater body of evidence surrounding Lennon's murder and how this inadequate coverage has allowed incriminating evidence to go unseen. Strongman steps back and puts Lennon's assassination into greater context by juxtaposing the evolution of western state security organizations, their politics, and methods with Lennon's own personal and political evolution, showing how the two influence and interact with each other.

The book's strength comes from the fact it deals with the conspiracy to kill Lennon in such a way that defeats the limited view created by state-controlled media sources by going out and documenting the covert doings of those agencies and establishing a precedent for their worst offenses. Strongman makes it impossible to ignore this precedent by discussing the evidence behind several key 1960's assassinations and their undoubtable relationship to those covert agencies. Once the readers are shown there's good reason to believe JFK, Malcolm X, MLK, and RFK were all killed by means of diabolical covert conspiracies it becomes more difficult to see Lennon's death as not being related, especially when all the detailed similarities are explained. This is further enhanced by illuminating the full world of covert agency evolution in tandem with Lennon's life. The effect this achieves is to create a 3 dimensional diorama where the reader can see cross section relevancies between these infamous assassinations not available from conventional sources. What has been effectively hidden by viewing each of these incidences by the sole means of their official stories and media coverage is now seen in a whole new light thanks to Strongman's fleshing-out of their true dimension. And when the previously segregated esoteric clues are assembled in correct context a hauntingly scary pattern of similarity occurs between all these assassinations and the motives for them, including Lennon's. Suddenly the link between all these assassinations becomes clear like a zodiac of constellations appearing in the same black night sky of covert murder.

'John Lennon Life, Times, & Assassination' shows how right-wing powers tried to counter the humanitarian liberalism of FDR. These powers coalesced during the cauldron of WWII into the OSS and later the CIA. The assembly of the people into one giant war power allowed these agencies to finally act on political purposes that were previously restricted by government form. Increasing this power under the dire pretext of the Cold War, CIA had become a separate power practicing political eugenics in the background with rules that allowed them to do so secretly. Advances in mechanized culture had allowed a departmentalization of society where social tasks were left to increasingly separate entities. While the people assumed CIA was acting in their best interests they were bascially left alone and took full advantage. This WWII mentality of all assembled under one military government was extended into the Cold War with CIA being the main, invisible controlling body. Strongman shows how this growing covert power and Lennon were headed on a collision course that eventually resulted in Lennon showing-up on CIA and FBI radar for his anti-war activities. Mixed in with this is a well-constructed case for the evidence of covert involvement in those famous 60's assassinations. When you compare how Lennon existed within this covert profile it becomes impossible to separate his assassination out from the others. Especially when key clues shown in FBI and CIA's own files conform to other incriminating clues that give away their involvement. While doing this Strongman parallels how post-colonial decline was forcing covert agencies into increasingly drastic actions to combat communism that led to seeing peace activists as threats to the state and reacting with assassination. This finally culminates in a deft presentation of all the similar symptoms of mind control hypnosis between Lee Harvey Oswald, Sirhan Sirhan, and Chapman, as well as other subtle clues. So, in the end, when the full body of evidence is presented, including all these shielded histories and clues, it becomes more than obvious CIA assassinated Lennon, as Strongman concludes.

I have to thank Strongman because he's the only published source I've seen who mentions that Jimi Hendrix's death also strongly conforms to this pattern and that the claim he was murdered by his manager for money might be a limited hang-out for a more sinister covert murder of the type shown in his book.


.