Jump to content
The Education Forum
Micah Mileto

A Lie Too Big To Fail by Lisa Pease

Recommended Posts

Back in the 1990s I had an argument with a friend of Moldea's -- when I told him Moldea had done some good

early work (his book DARK VICTORY: RONALD REAGAN, MCA, AND THE MOB is a revealing work

of Hollywood and political history) but then turned and sold out on the RFK case (see

how he changed his supposed viewpoint between his Washington Post article and his book), my

friend (a fellow reporter) became incensed and started ranting incoherently. I also argued

with my friend (who himself has done some good work on labor issues and so forth) about conspiracies -- he claimed there

are no conspiracies in politics, etc. etc. I simply mentioned Watergate and asked if he thought it was a conspiracy, and he went off on another tirade.

Someone else I know was railing against conspiracy theories, and I mentioned she believed in a conspiracy theory

about 9/11. She was surprised and asked what I meant. I said, "The conspiracy theory that nineteen Arabs armed with box cutters

brought down the Twin Towers." She was thrown aback and tried to explain that wasn't what she

meant by conspiracy. Evidently to them conspiracy means any viewpoint opposing the official story. 

Edited by Joseph McBride

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to Lisa's book ... I'm almost through it.  I would add that she really does a nice job of digging into the detail of the ballistics, the bullet controversies, and the numerous (not well known) witnesses who were suppressed (or buried) by LAPD SUS.  Also, the slipshod work of DeWayne Wolfer, who was compromised, incompetent and blatantly complicit in manipulating or falsifying the evidence.  For his "service", he was then promoted to head the LAPD Crime Lab, and later made the head of ACE Security (talk about the fox guarding the henhouse).  But his unethical actions and flawed findings were clearly refuted by the excellent challenges of forensic expert Robert Harper ... who in turn was sandbagged by the Ron Kessler of the Washington Post.  Its instructive that the RFK investigation was concurrent with Garrison's work, and may of the same players were very busy spinning the facts.  I think Lisa takes this part of the story much further than any other previous author (e.g. Kaiser, Turner & Christian, Melanson, Shane O'Sullivan, etc.).  She does a meticulous job of citing references and sources, and conducted an amazing number of interviews.  Its a good read, and informative.  Her book certainly has me thinking ... and I'm wondering why Bobby's death was not focused on by the HSCA, which originally was to take on all three murders.  Also, the mysterious death in March 1980 (actually an assassination) of Allard Lowenstein, who was determined to find justice for RFK. Some areas that I wish she could've taken further/deeper are the background of Michael Wayne, the identity of the Polka Dot girl, Officer Manuel Pena (a true bad guy, the ultimate bona fides of Thane Cesar (a Robert Maheu hitman for sure), and the suspicious John Antoine Khoury character (with apparent QJ WIN tentacles). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

To that point I can definitely say that anybody that reads John's book is going to have a very hard time not concluding that more than one gun and one shooter was involved.  Or that Wolfer was very well aware of the evidence for that.

I conclude such from A Lie Too Big, and before it The Assassinations and your series of essay's.  I look forward to Mr. Hunt's addition to the evidence confirming Sirhan's innocence.  I'm truly sorry about his passing at a young age and offer sincere condolences to his family and friends as I respect his efforts in the search for the Truth.

There  are two issues in the book that should be laid out on the table so to speak that will be howled at by the RFK lone nutters,  and ignored, buried even further than the Assassination itself by the MSM.  Too incredible too believe.

One.  Sirhan was hypnotized at the time of the Assassination and afterwards as well as likely drugged beforehand.  This was done through CIA programs MKULTRA and more specifically  the ZRALERT program for hypnosis within ZRIFLE at the nearby largest Navy ground facility in the US nearby in Corona California (read ONI)where he worked as a jockey .

Two.  Like Oswald, Sirhan didn't shoot anybody.  He shot blanks.  He thought he might have shot RFK because he was hypnotized and could only remember shooting at a shooting range on command at the time of the Assassination, under hypnosis in recent years.  At least two witnesses saw flashes and bits of paper coming out of his gun barrel.  Most were ducking and dodging the shots from the shooter behind him aimed to his right hitting pedestrians.  Sirhan was a distraction.

"They" didn't want Sirhan to hit the true assassins, Cesar and another, by accident.

Edited by Ron Bulman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

At least two witnesses saw flashes and bits of paper coming out of his gun barrel.  Most were ducking and dodging the shots from the shooter behind him aimed to his right hitting pedestrians.  Sirhan was a distraction.

"They" didn't want Sirhan to hit the true assassins, Cesar and another, by accident.

I have trouble believing that Sirhan was firing blanks.  On the one hand, it does make sense in that he would not accidentally hit the shooters behind RFK.  On the other hand, we know that various bystanders were able to grab Sirhan's arm and pin it to a table although he was able to continue firing.  What if he was disarmed before he fired all rounds and it was discovered that the remaining rounds were blanks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Daniel Rice said:

I have trouble believing that Sirhan was firing blanks.  On the one hand, it does make sense in that he would not accidentally hit the shooters behind RFK.  On the other hand, we know that various bystanders were able to grab Sirhan's arm and pin it to a table although he was able to continue firing.  What if he was disarmed before he fired all rounds and it was discovered that the remaining rounds were blanks?

I still wonder about the possibility myself, although it is presented reasonably and logically in the book.  I'm sure a lot of people laugh at or roll their eyes and stop reading when the subject of hypnosis comes up.  Even though our government via the cia considered it a realistic possibility enough to create a program on it and spend a bunch of our money on that program unbeknownst to us.  If the all knowing cia thought it might be useful it must be true, for our benefit.

The book does broach another possibility regarding the tiny bits of paper floating down during the shots.  That they were the result of shots fired into the ceiling.  Tiny bits of it floating down.  LAPD lead crime scene/evidence investigator Wolfer commented on the number of holes in the ceiling.  In a picture on page 2 or 3 of this thread of the pantry I noticed there were eight ceiling panels removed, purportedly as evidence, though never used, then disappeared, like the door frames.

Sirhan was supposedly bent over backwards onto one of the steam tables by/between the second and third shot by multiple people.  Yet, as you note, he continued firing, wherever his pinned arm pointed.  Then they managed to get him to drop the gun, yet he managed, under this mass of humanity, bent backwards, to pick it up again and keep firing.  Wherever the gun was pointing.  I have to wonder if his hand was pointing up toward the ceiling.

By the same token, if it was meticulously planned and rehearsed (courtesy of Maheu... and Angleton?)  If Sirhan was hypnotized, programed, might he not have been instructed to keep firing until he ran out of bullets, on the firing range, during "practice"?  To ensure all evidence of blanks was eliminated?  I don't know.

Edited by Ron Bulman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What sense does it make that a shooter behind RFK would miss badly enough to injure others? Blanks seems very illogical

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

What sense does it make that a shooter behind RFK would miss badly enough to injure others? Blanks seems very illogical 

Can't see a second shooter if you're getting shot, maybe?

Edited by Micah Mileto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you read Lisa's book closely (including the preface), she describes the entire operation as a magic act ... classic deception by a large team of operatives. The entire "show" was rigged - ACE Security, Hotel Security (Gardner, Murphy), LAPD (Pena, Hernandez, et al), the District Attorney and prosecutors (read Evelle Younger's biography, to understand how the autopsy photos ended up in Angleton's safe), the Crime Lab (Wolfer), Sirhan's so-called "defense" team (Cooper, Kaiser, et al), the US Attorney (William Byrne, Jr., later proposed as FBI Director and nominated to the federal bench by President Nixon) ... even the Mayor (Sam Yorty).  They even infiltrated the Medical Examiner's Office and tried to discredit Thomas Noguchi (i.e. phony physician Donald Angus Stuart). The deck was stacked. Lisa makes a good case for the fact that Sirhan was manipulated in the pantry and used as a distraction (and likely shot blanks), as was Michael Wayne (i.e. to draw focus). One need only examine the background and connections of Thane Cesar to understand where the real bullets originated from. And separate from the weapon in Sirhan's hand (which was never traced/connected to the ballistics), there were clearly multiple weapons in play. There were Sirhan look-alikes (doppelgangers), operatives dressed as busboys, kitchen managers and "auditors" (e.g. John Khoury) and individuals supplied with press badges. Many suspects were described by witnesses (who statements were buried in records) as looking Mexican, but speaking a foreign language (i.e. Lebanese Arabic). Lisa makes some interesting connections to Robert Maheu and certain QJ WIN contacts (i.e. Harold Meltzer, who worked out of the Ambassador Hotel, and one Hanna Yazbeck). Instead of Communists and Russia, the backdrop cover story (read motive) was now Israel/Palestine and the Middle East. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if this is the same Harold Meltzer but he seems like a good candidate. 

Both BOMPENSIERO and FRATIANNO spoke in extremely critical and profane terms of HAROLD "HAPPY'' MELTZER and LOUIS TOM DRAGNA and 'his father, THOMAS F. DRAGNA. FRATIANNO, in particular, was quite bitter in his comments.

Page 8

http://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/jfk/NARA-Oct2017/2018/docid-32306917.pdf

Meltzer and Yazbeck

http://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/jfk/NARA-Oct2017/2018/104-10308-10287.pdf

Good read. Last page on Meltzer and Yazbeck.

http://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/jfk/NARA-Oct2017/2018/157-10003-10490.pdf

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Micah Mileto said:

Can't see a second shooter if you're getting shot, maybe?

Never thought of that - thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm wondering if the original plan was to frame it as 8 shots, but the shooters panicked when they saw Sirhan's hand be subdued.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

I'm wondering if the original plan was to frame it as 8 shots, but the shooters panicked when they saw Sirhan's hand be subdued.

The LAPD kept it down to 8 shots, along with the DA and Sirhans lawyers.  Ceiling tiles, door frames, with shots in them never brought up at the trial much less two bullet tracks.  The last alone means more than 8 shots.  At least one of Sirhans lawyers was compromised with a personal case hanging in the balance.  I don't remember if the book says if they ever even tried to really review the physical evidence or if so how much the DA/LAPD let them see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, David Boylan said:

I'm not sure if this is the same Harold Meltzer but he seems like a good candidate. 

Both BOMPENSIERO and FRATIANNO spoke in extremely critical and profane terms of HAROLD "HAPPY'' MELTZER and LOUIS TOM DRAGNA and 'his father, THOMAS F. DRAGNA. FRATIANNO, in particular, was quite bitter in his comments.

Page 8

http://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/jfk/NARA-Oct2017/2018/docid-32306917.pdf

Meltzer and Yazbeck

http://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/jfk/NARA-Oct2017/2018/104-10308-10287.pdf

Good read. Last page on Meltzer and Yazbeck.

http://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/jfk/NARA-Oct2017/2018/157-10003-10490.pdf

 

 

Very interesting David.  Thanks.  If Meltzer was at some point affiliated with the cia through qjwin  LA activities...   And he had upper level LA mob associations.  And he had a office in the Ambassador Hotel in mid 1968...  He should have been questioned, in depth.  But there's a good chance he was used by those who should have been questioning him. 

Edited by Ron Bulman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As Gene Kelly kind of alludes to in his last post there are multiple implications indicating a framing of Sirhan from a middle east standpoint.  Sirhan's traumatic very young youth used  against him in his trial, "building he lived in used as a machine gun nest, home bombed, living in a shelter, 3 year old Sirhan seeing a girls leg blown off by a bomb, dead bodies on the street". (yet Sirhan has no animosity about this, stating he was raised in America and considers himself American).

Witness Francis Critcheley described polka dot dress girl 1 as having an olive complexion, similar to Mediterranean.   Two others described a long thin nose, one a Nassar nose.

Then there was John Fahey who met a girl in a restaurant at breakfast that morning at the Ambassador and spent the day driving her up the coast and back.  She claimed "they" were going to get Kennedy that night at the "party".  Said she had just come from Beirut. Then changed names, and, homes throughout the day to different places in the Mideast.  

More witnesses described people whose actions they considered suspicious as foreign or Mexican looking.

Then we're back to the kitchen accountant at the Ambassador for six months, John Khoury.  Born in Beirut.  In LA reputedly for an education, financed by a wealthy man from there who died.  Then when he is arrested over late car payments the woman making the claim is called by the American Embassy from Beirut asking her not to press charges?   After his first questioning by the LAPD he visits the office of the witness who also works at that Ambassador that ID'd him being there three separate times that night (witness was out of town).  In his second interview he changes his story to a more ridiculous one, is never questioned again, and I guess, disappeared from history.

Then we have Angleton.  Still chief of black op's at the time, and the Israeli desk.  In effect controller of all US clandestine operations in the Mideast.  Maheu's "former" superior?

If I stereotype Meltzer as Jewish, maybe a representative of Lansky in LA with an office in the Ambassador (Gene), having a prior relationship with the cia...  QJWINN, California office? 

Edited by Ron Bulman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even the prosecution agreed that RFK was shot in the head, from as close as one inch, and yet considered the shooter to be Sirhan when he was never within three feet of the senator. 

 

Can any of the "Sirhan did it" supporters, explain that away?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...