Article: How the Pentagon Broke the Deadlock over the START Treaty & Iran's Nuclear Ambitions at John Wheeler's Exp...

[Jan Klimkowski]

I do think that Peter Presland should also have included my critical comments about John Young before he passed along my explanation of why I know that the Pentagon has the ability to create man-made earthquakes.

The best confirmation of it is the fact that Cryptome.org belatedly posted the 16-part series that I wrote about it during 2009-10 - what he must have gotten even more heat from viewers than what my article has drawn here. Young was persuaded to post the series in aiding and abetting the Pentagon and CIA attempt to prove that I was either working for a foreign intelligence agency, especially Iran's, or that I was a leaker of secret information from some spy, probably Tehran's.

Young had even spurred me on in such endeavors by meeting me in NYC in June 2009, warning me that the Agency was again out to get me - what it had done back in Portugal during 1995-96 when it tried to make poisoning me to death for criticising Clinton's treatment of former President Nixon, Al 'Deep Throat Haig, and former DCI Richard Helms at the White House look like a natural death.

Of course, Young's warning just pushed me harder on the matter, and what Washington hoped to fix me up with, like Amir Aldabili, when I came the States in late August for a seven-week stay, near where it would be easy for me to snoop around Livermore National Laboratory and Thomas Reed's residence in Healdsburg. Young refused to see me either coming or going for fear of being drawn into the entrapment, and not wanting to take up any time while in NYC so I would more likely visit the Iranian Legation to the UN.

In short, I know that this confirms what I claim, and if they had been successful in countering, I would have been locked up for the rest of my life.

And I do find it funny that critics here only talk about earthquakes being made in ways my explanation avoids, and that I am insulting the Iranian intelligence service - what I consulted when dealing with Washington's attempts to entrap me - when I called it Savak, implying only that its network going back to the Shah's time must be the base for murdering its enemies, especially covert operators like John Wheeler III.

Trowbridge - welcome to DPF, and thank you for your comments.

At the heart of your claim that Iranian intelligence assassinated Wheeler is the assertion that the Americans have deliberately engineered earthquakes to sabotage or delay the Iranian nuclear programme. This is a key part of the rationale you provide for the death of Wheeler.

As I stated in my original post, I am sympathetic to the idea that certain countries possess the technological capability to create earthquakes. However, the engineering of specific named earthquakes is stated as fact in your article, so it is surely correct that the evidence for that part of your argument is critically examined.

In your post above, if I understand correctly, you claim that the CIA and/or Pentagon has attempted to frame you, Trowbridge H Ford, as an agent of Iranian intelligence. Regardless of the truth or falsity of that claim, it is relevant to at least consider it given that you are now claiming that Iranian intelligence assassinated Wheeler for his sabotage of the Iranian nuclear programme.

In response to my criticism of your use of the defunct name Savak to describe C21st Iranian intelligence, you wrote as follows:

And I do find it funny that critics here only talk about earthquakes being made in ways my explanation avoids, and that I am insulting the Iranian intelligence service - what I consulted when dealing with Washington's attempts to entrap me - when I called it Savak, implying only that its network going back to the Shah's time must be the base for murdering its enemies, especially covert operators like John Wheeler III.

Are you stating that your use of the name Savak was not erroneous, but was deliberate? And that you implied by its usage continuity with the intelligence service of the Shah?

[Trowbridge H. Ford]

I do think that Peter Presland should also have included my critical comments about John Young before he passed along my explanation of why I know that the Pentagon has the ability to create man-made earthquakes.

The best confirmation of it is the fact that Cryptome.org belatedly posted the 16-part series that I wrote about it during 2009-10 - what he must have gotten even more heat from viewers than what my article has drawn here. Young was persuaded to post the series in aiding and abetting the Pentagon and CIA attempt to prove that I was either working for a foreign intelligence agency, especially Iran's, or that I was a leaker of secret information from some spy, probably Tehran's.

Young had even spurred me on in such endeavors by meeting me in NYC in June 2009, warning me that the Agency was again out to get me - what it had done back in Portugal during 1995-96 when it tried to make poisoning me to death for criticising Clinton's treatment of former President Nixon, Al 'Deep Throat Haig, and former DCI Richard Helms at the White House look like a natural death.

Of course, Young's warning just pushed me harder on the matter, and what Washington hoped to fix me up with, like Amir Aldabili, when I came the States in late August for a seven-week stay, near where it would be easy for me to snoop around Livermore National Laboratory and Thomas Reed's residence in Healdsburg. Young refused to see me either coming or going for fear of being drawn into the entrapment, and not wanting to take up any time while in NYC so I would more likely visit the Iranian Legation to the UN.

In short, I know that this confirms what I claim, and if they had been successful in countering, I would have been locked up for the rest of my life.

And I do find it funny that critics here only talk about earthquakes being made in ways my explanation avoids, and that I am insulting the Iranian intelligence service - what I consulted when dealing with Washington's attempts to entrap me - when I called it Savak, implying only that its network going back to the Shah's time must be the base for murdering its enemies, especially covert operators like John Wheeler III.

Trowbridge - welcome to DPF, and thank you for your comments.

At the heart of your claim that Iranian intelligence assassinated Wheeler is the assertion that the Americans have deliberately engineered earthquakes to sabotage or delay the Iranian nuclear programme. This is a key part of the rationale you provide for the death of Wheeler.

As I stated in my original post, I am sympathetic to the idea that certain countries possess the technological capability to create earthquakes. However, the engineering of specific named earthquakes is stated as fact in your article, so it is surely correct that the evidence for that part of your argument is critically examined.

In your post above, if I understand correctly, you claim that the CIA and/or Pentagon has attempted to frame you, Trowbridge H Ford, as an agent of Iranian intelligence. Regardless of the truth or falsity of that claim, it is relevant to at least consider it given that you are now claiming that Iranian intelligence assassinated Wheeler for his sabotage of the Iranian nuclear programme.

In response to my criticism of your use of the defunct name Savak to describe C21st Iranian intelligence, you wrote as follows:

And I do find it funny that critics here only talk about earthquakes being made in ways my explanation avoids, and that I am insulting the Iranian intelligence service - what I consulted when dealing with Washington's attempts to entrap me - when I called it Savak, implying only that its network going back to the Shah's time must be the base for murdering its enemies, especially covert operators like John Wheeler III.

Are you stating that your use of the name Savak was not erroneous, but was deliberate? And that you implied by its usage continuity with the intelligence service of the Shah?

Jan, since you have behaved in a civil manner, I shall start answering your questions.

The use of the term Savak was deliberate, and I believe most strongly that there was continuity between the Shah's past and Wheeler's assassination.

The best evidence, in my opinion, is the unexpected suicide of Ali-reza Pahlavi on January 4, 2011 in Boston. He was much less interested than his older brother Reza in seeing the monarchy restored. He just wanted to see Iran become a democratic state which honored human rights.

I found it most intriguing when the writer of "The Suicide of Alireza Pahlavi: A Revolt Against Forced Exile" put these thoughts in the mind of the deceased:

"I'll do something that has nothing to do with me because the assumption is that I don't exist anymore. I could do something for the people for which I am suffering that would take me up to death."

So what did he do which led him to quietly take his own life?

I am working on the assumption that he somehow established a sting on Wheeler because of what he had done to his Iranian people. A meeting was arranged at the hotel in Wilmington on December 29th, I think, where Alireza's security guards got what they wanted after they drugged Wheeler when he arrived at the appointed roon, and stole his Blackberry, brief case, and mobile phone.

After they checked out their contents, they gained entry to his house, possibly with more assistance by Ali-reza, and after they got all the information they could from Wheeler, they killed him, and disposed of his body, thinking that it would never be found.

When it was found, Ali-reza, instead of enjoying some satisfaction for having gotten rid of Iran's worst tormentor, had to hurriedly commit suicide.

The reaction of Washington and Tehran to the suicide was most unexpected too.

More in the article I am now writing.

[David Guyatt]

The best evidence, in my opinion, is the unexpected suicide of Ali-reza Pahlavi on January 4, 2011 in Boston. He was much less interested than his older brother Reza in seeing the monarchy restored. He just wanted to see Iran become a democratic state which honored human rights.

I found it most intriguing when the writer of "The Suicide of Alireza Pahlavi: A Revolt Against Forced Exile" put these thoughts in the mind of the deceased:

"I'll do something that has nothing to do with me because the assumption is that I don't exist anymore. I could do something for the people for which I am suffering that would take me up to death."

So what did he do which led him to quietly take his own life?

I am working on the assumption that he somehow established a sting on Wheeler because of what he had done to his Iranian people. A meeting was arranged at the hotel in Wilmington on December 29th, I think, where Alireza's security guards got what they wanted after they drugged Wheeler when he arrived at the appointed roon, and stole his Blackberry, brief case, and mobile phone.

After they checked out their contents, they gained entry to his house, possibly with more assistance by Ali-reza, and after they got all the information they could from Wheeler, they killed him, and disposed of his body, thinking that it would never be found.

When it was found, Ali-reza, instead of enjoying some satisfaction for having gotten rid of Iran's worst tormentor, had to hurriedly commit suicide.

The reaction of Washington and Tehran to the suicide was most unexpected too.

More in the article I am now writing.

Mr. Ford, after some reflection I have decided to withdraw my word "purposefully" from my earlier post - for the time being. I think it was a rush to judgement and probably unfair.

The foregoing statement you made (in answer to Jan's post), in a nutshell explains my concerns, which I think now focuses on your lack of caveating your statements. For example, stating that Savak did it, based on entirely circumstantial evidence. The facts are that Pahlavi's suicide may have been connected to Wheeler's death. It may not have been. Wheeler may have been offed by "Savak". He may not have been.

We don't know.

I find the same lack of caveating in your claims that the NSA was responsible for the deaths of William Colby and Gareth Williams to be equally reckless. I also fundamentally disagree with your statements of fact that Amir was responsible for killing Yitzak Rabin with a single shot. The actual evidence is different to this. I am also dubious about your "whodunnit" re the assassination of Olaf Palme where your story caption states "Yugoslav assassin killed Olof Palme", which I find is a little too Tabloid in style for my tastes.

That would be an opinion, not a fact, in case you were wondering...

To be clear: I am all in favour of anyone advancing reasonably argued hypotheses about deep political events. This is what this forum is all about. But it behooves anyone making deductions to caveat those deductions as, well... deductions.

Not statements of fact.

I hope this is not too uncivil of me.

And speaking of that, I have to say that for someone who says he's former US Army Counter Intelligence Corp, you seem to me to have an unusually thin skin -- not to say an unusual way of "writing reports" that are fundamentally opinionated rather than factually detached.

As I say, there's no harm in that, it's just seems a bit strange (to this Brit anyway) given your professed former occupation.

[Trowbridge H. Ford]

The best evidence, in my opinion, is the unexpected suicide of Ali-reza Pahlavi on January 4, 2011 in Boston. He was much less interested than his older brother Reza in seeing the monarchy restored. He just wanted to see Iran become a democratic state which honored human rights.

I found it most intriguing when the writer of "The Suicide of Alireza Pahlavi: A Revolt Against Forced Exile" put these thoughts in the mind of the deceased:

"I'll do something that has nothing to do with me because the assumption is that I don't exist anymore. I could do something for the people for which I am suffering that would take me up to death."

So what did he do which led him to quietly take his own life?

I am working on the assumption that he somehow established a sting on Wheeler because of what he had done to his Iranian people. A meeting was arranged at the hotel in Wilmington on December 29th, I think, where Alireza's security guards got what they wanted after they drugged Wheeler when he arrived at the appointed roon, and stole his Blackberry, brief case, and mobile phone.

After they checked out their contents, they gained entry to his house, possibly with more assistance by Ali-reza, and after they got all the information they could from Wheeler, they killed him, and disposed of his body, thinking that it would never be found.

When it was found, Ali-reza, instead of enjoying some satisfaction for having gotten rid of Iran's worst tormentor, had to hurriedly commit suicide.

The reaction of Washington and Tehran to the suicide was most unexpected too.

More in the article I am now writing.

Mr. Ford, after some reflection I have decided to withdraw my word "purposefully" from my earlier post - for the time being. I think it was a rush to judgement and probably unfair.

The foregoing statement you made (in answer to Jan's post), in a nutshell explains my concerns, which I think now focuses on your lack of caveating your statements. For example, stating that Savak did it, based on entirely circumstantial evidence. The facts are that Pahlavi's suicide may have been connected to Wheeler's death. It may not have been. Wheeler may have been offed by "Savak". He may not have been.

We don't know.

I find the same lack of caveating in your claims that the NSA was responsible for the deaths of William Colby and Gareth Williams to be equally reckless. I also fundamentally disagree with your statements of fact that Amir was responsible for killing Yitzak Rabin with a single shot. The actual evidence is different to this. I am also dubious about your "whodunnit" re the assassination of Olaf Palme where your story caption states "Yugoslav assassin killed Olof Palme", which I find is a little too Tabloid in style for my tastes.

That would be an opinion, not a fact, in case you were wondering...

To be clear: I am all in favour of anyone advancing reasonably argued hypotheses about deep political events. This is what this forum is all about. But it behooves anyone making deductions to caveat those deductions as, well... deductions.

Not statements of fact.

I hope this is not too uncivil of me.

And speaking of that, I have to say that for someone who says he's former US Army Counter Intelligence Corp, you seem to me to have an unusually thin skin -- not to say an unusual way of "writing reports" that are fundamentally opinionated rather than factually detached.

As I say, there's no harm in that, it's just seems a bit strange (to this Brit anyway) given your professed former occupation.

I find your post totally worthless, where you take a most scatter-shot approach to my work, some of it totally erroneous and others debateable - though you never state what your position is - rather than say anything substantial about my claims regarding the assassination of John P. Wheeler, III.

This just happened, and any work on it cannot be carried on in the manner you require where you want proof - what only a court can supply - when most of these murders, especially this one, will apparently never supply any such proof as they often never even get to court. I do indicate, on occasion, that they are working hypothesis, subject to change upon further research.

You remind me so much of another Brit on The Local, Nomark, who is constantly demanding proof of everything, as most understanding of important assassinations only results in various conjectures.

You have obviously mistaken my work on the assassinations of Swedish politicians Olof Palme and Anna Lindh. I have never claimed in tabloid stye that "Yugoslav assassin killed Olof Palme."

I have always claimed that Captain Simon Hayward, Ops Officer of the 14 Intelligence Company's South Detachment (June 1985-March 1987) aka Captain James Rennie killed the Swedish statsminister when he was reassessing the performance of his bodyguards for former SAS Major David Walker's KMS firm when the the RMP were no longer able to do it.

It was Anna Lindh who had her guts cut out by Serbian Mijailo Mijailovic while he was programmed as a Manchurian Candidate by a nearby remote viewing squad to kill her in the name of Jesus.

Your making this vast mistake convinces me more that you are just set on discrediting me, as your wondering why I have such an allegedly thin skin while I was apparently an intelligence analyst with CIC. My service did not make me either more or less thin-skinned. I did not write reports, though, as you claim: I only tried to make enough sense of the reports that agents prepared so that they could be sent to headquarters in a readable fashion.

Your post, in short, is just building on your previous claim that I am an American
SMOM, playing games with fellow covert operators to muddy the waters about anything.

[Jan Klimkowski]

Trowbridge - thank you for further expanding your intriguing hypothesis about the death of John Wheeler and the possible involvement of parties close to the now deceased (suicided?) Alireza Pahlavi.

I agree that when we are close to events, our explorations and hypotheses must necessarily be considered speculative and sufficiently fluid to accomodate fresh information and evidence as it is uncovered.

In your response to David, you write:

[
I have always claimed that Captain Simon Hayward, Ops Officer of the 14 Intelligence Company's South Detachment (June 1985-March 1987) aka Captain James Rennie killed the Swedish statsminister when he was reassessing the performance of his bodyguards for former SAS Major David Walker's KMS firm when the the RMP were no longer able to do it.

It was Anna Lindh who had her guts cut out by Serbian Mijailo Mijailovic while he was programmed as a Manchurian Candidate by a nearby remote viewing squad to kill her in the name of Jesus.

"Manchurian Candidate" and "remote viewing" are terms that have several meanings and interpretations, and I am anxious to avoid any misunderstandings (as these have occurred in other discussions and conversations with researchers and investigators).

My own working definition of "Manchurian Candidate" is of a person programmed through some combination of covert scientific techniques, probably involving pain, narcotics, trauma and/or hypnosis, to perform a particular action of which that person has no conscious knowledge, upon receiving a trigger signal. The action is most commonly understood to be an act of murder, or assassination. However, I would add as a crucial caveat that most historically identified Manchurian Candidates have in fact been used by their controllers as Manchurian Patsies, programmed to be in the right place at the right time to take the blame for assassinations carried out by otherwise unidentified professionals.

"Remote viewing" is similarly a contentious term. I try to restrict my usage of it to the use of the "remote viewing" techniques exposed in the 1990s during the "Stargate" revelations of such as Ingo Swann, Pat Price, and Joseph McMoneagle.

Trowbridge - if, in your passage above, you are using these terms in a fundamentally different fashion, I would be most grateful for any clarification.

[Trowbridge H. Ford]

Trowbridge - thank you for further expanding your intriguing hypothesis about the death of John Wheeler and the possible involvement of parties close to the now deceased (suicided?) Alireza Pahlavi.

I agree that when we are close to events, our explorations and hypotheses must necessarily be considered speculative and sufficiently fluid to accomodate fresh information and evidence as it is uncovered.

In your response to David, you write:

[
I have always claimed that Captain Simon Hayward, Ops Officer of the 14 Intelligence Company's South Detachment (June 1985-March 1987) aka Captain James Rennie killed the Swedish statsminister when he was reassessing the performance of his bodyguards for former SAS Major David Walker's KMS firm when the the RMP were no longer able to do it.

It was Anna Lindh who had her guts cut out by Serbian Mijailo Mijailovic while he was programmed as a Manchurian Candidate by a nearby remote viewing squad to kill her in the name of Jesus.

"Manchurian Candidate" and "remote viewing" are terms that have several meanings and interpretations, and I am anxious to avoid any misunderstandings (as these have occurred in other discussions and conversations with researchers and investigators).

My own working definition of "Manchurian Candidate" is of a person programmed through some combination of covert scientific techniques, probably involving pain, narcotics, trauma and/or hypnosis, to perform a particular action of which that person has no conscious knowledge, upon receiving a trigger signal. The action is most commonly understood to be an act of murder, or assassination. However, I would add as a crucial caveat that most historically identified Manchurian Candidates have in fact been used by their controllers as Manchurian Patsies, programmed to be in the right place at the right time to take the blame for assassinations carried out by otherwise unidentified professionals.

"Remote viewing" is similarly a contentious term. I try to restrict my usage of it to the use of the "remote viewing" techniques exposed in the 1990s during the "Stargate" revelations of such as Ingo Swann, Pat Price, and Joseph McMoneagle.

Trowbridge - if, in your passage above, you are using these terms in a fundamentally different fashion, I would be most grateful for any clarification.

Right, Jan, and thanks for a constructive post.

The whole idea of a Manchurian Candidate since it was developed in the immediate post-war period - the idea of programming some kind of message deep into the mind of a potential assassin which would be triggered by some kind of event - has gone through significant development since it was first thought.

The CIA's development has gone far beyond this, while readers are still stuck in the text of Joh Marks' The Search for the 'Manchurian Candidate'.

If one even goes to the trouble of reading the notes, one discovers a rapid hypnosis that Dr. White, as I recall, tried to implant in some potential one in July 1963. This was quite clearly attempted on LHO, and it did not take because he would never entertain the idea of killing JFK, so the CIA scum settled upon Jack Ruby and his Mafia associates, especially Richard Cain who killed the President, and Chuckie Nicoletti et al. helping out.

Since then, machines have been developed by which voices can the implanted, like in the Anna Lindh case, where a drugged person, deprived of sleep, can be commanded to do simpler killings, thinking that the idea came from their own brains.

I am convinced that this process happened to me a couple of years ago when I suddenly was having a dream of some pursuing me, only for a voice to exclaim; "He's got a knife, and he's going to kill you." Little wonder that I then vaulted out of bed, missing by inches a bed stand table whose marble top would have seriously injured me, if not killed me if I had hit it, and falling on the floor below without seriously injuring myself. This is something which has never happened in my life before or since.

For more, you might be interested in the article I had about the process in the killings of JFK, MLK, RFK, and George Wallace in Issue Eight of Eye Spy magazine.

[Trowbridge H. Ford]

While I am hardly surprised at David Guyatt's disappearance from this discussion, given all the wild claims he made about my research, I did expect him to stick around long enough so that we could clarify which American agency, the CIA or NSA, did the job on former DCI William Colby.

In reading James Bamford's Body of Secrets, it seems more likely that a unit within NSA's Special Collection Service (SCS) did it, like the assassination of guard Ricca at the new site of the National Reconnaissance Office a few years earlier, since it had taken over from Bill Harvey's ZR/RIFLE project within the CIA's Division D after the fallout from the Watergate scandal. (pp. 477-80)

SCS is to make the most of America's sigint capability by making sure that human troublemakers do not leak its operations or capabilities - what Colby and Ricca threatened to do.

For more of this, see DC Dave's account of not only Bamford's but also Bob Woodward's lack of interest in Ricca's killing when they were discussing Angus Mackenzie's Secrets after his troubling death.

It was only with Bamford's book that researchers could get up to speed about what NSA is really capable of, and doing.

[Magda Hassan]

David Guyatt has some personal matters to attend to which require his ongoing attention and when completed he will be back on the forum participating fully.

[David Guyatt]

Thanks Maggie but I'm able to drop in from time to time.

And my view remains unchanged.

EDit = PS, to clarify the foregoing my view about Mr. Trowbridge remains unaltered.

[Trowbridge H. Ford]

No surprise that Mr. David rejects any discussion of his complaints about me, and claims about my research as he has no answer for these wild replies.

Anyone interested in what NSA has done regarding assassinations since the early 1990s and ending up now should read James Bamford's Body of Secrets as it shows that its Special Collection Service (SCS), headquartered on Springfield Road in Beltsville, Maryland, a few miles south of NSA itself, has always had overall control of such operations, and once the Church Committee saw to its stopping use of Harvey's ZR/RIFLE project in CIA's Division D, it became all NSA's.

The book even includes Harvey's description of the joint NSA/CIA project. (p. 478)

SCS assassinations which seem likely are those of Viktor Gunnarsson, one of the fall guys for the Palme assassination; Catherine Miller when Gunnarsson's was done so secretly that it was feared his body would never be found: former DCI William Colby; police guard Tina Ricca at the secretly being built headquarters for NSA's National Reconnaissance Office; GCHQ/MI6 agent Gareth Willams and his associate Gudrun Loftus; and possibly that of former KGB agent, turned babblermouth Alexander Litvinenko.

Would be interesting to get official confirmation that all those trips that Williams took to the States was actually to the SCS headquarters in Beltsville. If so, he would have been writing his own death warrant while there, explaining why he so quickly started dying when he got back to Britain on August 11, 2010.

For more about this, see my articles on codshit.com about their murders.

What is particularly disturbing about Bamford's account is that he made no attempt to fit any of these assassinations into his text or notes. (p. 680)