Jump to content
The Education Forum

Paz Marverde

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    791

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Paz Marverde

    Must read. Secret meeting between RFK and Garrison

    in Robert Kennedy Assassination

    Posted

    Resounding revelations on the assassination of John Kennedy. A conversation with Stephen Jaffe, member of the Garrison’s team that reopened the investigation in 1967

    Note: This is a translation of an Italian article by Michele Metta. Original here

    A large amount of years from now, the Italian version of Farewell America was published. As it will be even more self-evident thanks to the exclusive revelations that I am going to give now to the L’AntiDiplomatico’s readers, the story of this book is extremely peculiar, and in many ways very similar to that of another volume: Questo è Cefis (This is Cefis), a book published by a mysterious publishing house, apparently written by a likewise mysterious Giorgio Steimetz, and victim of a fast and furious disappearance due to the enormous and compromising revelations on Eugenio Cefis and the assassination of Enrico Mattei it contains. FarewellAmerica too, with the title of L’America brucia (America burns), was here published by a mysterious publishing house, apparently written by a likewise mysterious James Hepburn, was full of astonishing revelations on the assassination of John Kennedy, and almost immediately disappeared from every Italian bookshop. So here it is the necessity to republish it in 2012, thanks to the essayist Stefania Limiti, who in fact is also the author of an appendix containing a beautiful interview to William Turner. He was — please, pay attention — a member of Jim Garrison’s team, the New Orleans DA thanks whose courage, in 1967, the investigation on the assassination of JFK was reopened, coming to so important results that it was the subject for a very appreciated and excellent Oliver Stone’s movie. Interview where Turner confided to Limiti that Farewell America was read by Garrison himself, and that at the end of his reading, a request came from France, asking for someone of the DA staff to travel to Paris in order to apprehend some very important news. Turner would have loved to go, but he absolutely cannot. So, another Garrison’s collaborator was chosen instead: Stephen Jaffe. Jaffe that I was able to reach and that after watching my documentary on the assassination of JFK, has kindly accepted to answer some questions. An even more appreciable decision, given that the revelations contained in his answers will be the subject of a still unpublished work he is writing. A first step was to ask him about a fascinating moment described by Turner of that Parisian travel: de Gaulle in person, the celebrated President of France, gave a card to Jaffe, with written on it a Je suis très sensible a la confiance que vous m’exprimez. Words undoubtedly of appreciation towards both Jaffe and Garrison. Here it is Jaffe’s answer:

    The story is true. Gen. De Gaulle personally gave me his card with those words written on it. He did so in response to my request for some evidence that we met. I needed to prove that to my boss, Garrison.

    A journey, that made by Jaffe, besides extremely risky and adventurous:

    We were being closely watched by our own CIA. They were watching my movements but had trouble keeping up with me in Paris.

    Nevertheless, Jaffe has a very positive memory of his European experience:

    It was a trip during which I secured some valuable evidence for our investigation.

    At talking about Farewell America, Jaffe’s story has become even richer in really fascinating details. Here they are:

    I was asked to help with the publication of that book, Farewell America, which was previously to be called “America Burns.” I suggested the title “Farewell America” to the person who was the editor, which Garrison was going to use for his own book. The author was actually a composite of people working together for French Intelligence. They offered to appoint me the US publisher but I refused to be involved because it would have been unethical for me, as a representative of the New Orleans District Attorney, Garrison, to assist in such a commercial venture. I recommended the publisher for whom Turner worked, Ramparts Magazine. That’s how the book was published in the US but I refused any money from it on ethical grounds. They had sent me 10,000 copies of the book but I refused to even pick them up at the dock in Long Beach. That’s how careful I was as a member of Garrison’s staff.

    But the most shaking element undoubtedly arrives commenting Turner’s allusion to Limiti on a top-secret meeting between Garrison and Robert Kennedy. Jaffe gave me far more than a confirmation: it was Jaffe himself to organize this extraordinary rendezvous, whose goal for sure opens new scenarios about the assassination of RFK’s motive. Here they are his words:

    Before that meeting, I had a contact from a close friend of the Kennedy family who asked me to arrange the meeting. We also had help from another US Senator. RFK told Garrison in New York, at this very confidential meeting, that he was going to reopen the investigation into the assassination of President Kennedy but only after he was elected President. Only with that power, he explained, could he do so.

    A phrase, this latest, able to give a deep thrill when put together what the activist and environmentalist RFK Jr., son of Robert Kennedy, declared on the fiftieth anniversary of Dallas:

    My father believed the Warren Report was a shoddy piece of craftsmanship. He publicly supported the Warren Commission report but privately he was dismissive of it. My father thought that somebody [else] was involved. The evidence at this point I think is very, very convincing that it was not a lone gunman.

    A thrill which becomes even deeper when we add also what written once again by JFK’s nephew inside his latest book, American values:

    [CIA agent] Howard Hunt told his son that he met with the CIA’s leading anti-Castro operatives Frank Sturgis and David Morales in a CIA safe house in Miami to discuss the “big event” shortly beforehand –a plan to kill Jack.

    On the day Uncle Jack was assassinated, Fidel Castro was meeting with Jean Daniel at his summer presidential palace in Varadero Beach. At one p.m. they received a phone call with news that Jack had been shot. “Es una mala noticia,” Castro said to himself. Then, turning to Daniel, “There is the end to your mission of peace. Everything is going to change.” When the news came twenty minutes later that Jack was dead, Castro called it “a catastrophe.” Then he asked Daniel: “Who is Lyndon Johnson? What authority does he have over the CIA?” Hearing that American authorities were in hot pursuit of a suspect, Castro told Daniel, “You watch and see–I know them–they will try to put the blame on us for this thing.” And he was right. According to investigators on the House Select Committee on Assassinations, immediately following Jack’s assassination, operatives in the CIA’s Western Hemisphere Division promoted evidence–later proven false–suggesting that Castro had orchestrated President Kennedy’s assassination. The Senate’s Church Committee, which investigated the assassination for two years from 1975 to ’77, concluded that Cuba had nothing to do with Jack’s murder. Dan Hardway, an attorney who served as investigator for the House Committee, told me that the source of virtually every story blaming Castro was connected to the CIA’s Western Hemisphere chief and propaganda guru, David Atlee Phillips.

    This really means that Robert Kennedy’s son is pointing his finger towards the CIA about the assassination of JFK. CIA which comes back in another point of American values. This one:

    [Former CIA head] Allen Dulles told a young writer in 1965, “That little Kennedy, he thought he was a god.” LBJ would later appoint Dulles to the Warren Commission investigating Jack’s assassination, a curious choice at a time when some Americans, including my father, suspected the CIA’s involvement in JFK’s murder.

    CIA that –I’m concluding– comes back also in another phrase by Jaffe, this time commenting my documentary I made to synthesize my inquest. Inquest that undoubtedly shows the links between the CIA and Centro MondialeCommerciale, the Italian company Clay Shaw, incriminated by Garrison as a conspirator to kill John Kennedy, worked for; but it also shows, thanks to my exclusive papers, the connections between CMC and the subsequent Italian Strategy of Tension. Here it is his phrase, for which I absolutely thank him:

    It has a number of very interesting points in it, particularly regarding Clay Shaw, who’s connection with the CIA has now been proven beyond reasonable doubt.

    VOICING FOR BANNED MEMBERS

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    4 minutes ago, James R Gordon said:

    Paz,

    From what I know of you Paz, I do not see you as the kind of person who would agree to do such a thing.

    There is a difference between you and Brian Doyle, you have integrity.

    James.

    Thank you very much for your moving words, James. Really appreciated 

    VOICING FOR BANNED MEMBERS

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    2 hours ago, James R Gordon said:

    A member of this forum alerted me to the fact that one of our current members was essentially the opinions of a banned member - in this case Brian Doyle.

    What this issue has raised - and it is why I closed the thread till I could find an answer to it - is that if allowed to continue a banned member ( in this case Brian Doyle ) has now found a voice on our forum through another member. Whether witting, or unwitting, the current member has allowed himself to become the surrogate through which this banned member is now able to continue posting.

    This is not something the members of the admin team can allow to continue. In the next few hours the rules are going to be edited to reflect this change in what is acceptable on our forum. From this point on - even though the rules are yet to be edited - it will be an offence for any current member to voice the opinions and theories of any banned member.

    Any current member found to be doing that will immediately be place on “two posts a day” - which as everyone knows is actually a euphemism for being denied posting rights. The term of the punishment will be determined by admin. There will be no fixed term, the term therefore could be a short or long period as determined the members of the admin team.

    James.

    Doyle is a HUGE manipulator. He tried all days to induce me to post messages by him here. I did not 

    Carter: the POTUS nearest to JFK?

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    3 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

            I mentioned that Faneuil Hall story/flashback after reading James DiEugenio's remarks, because he reminded me of how unpopular Jimmy Carter had become by November of 1979, at least in Massachusetts (which, admittedly, has long been the most "liberal" planet in the U.S. solar system.)

       

         

    Probably. But we should understand how he became so unpopular. His own fault? Not at all: the real explanation is he was victim of so many dirty tricks whose goal was to destroy his reputation. And not only that. That's more, but I keep it for me, at the moment  

    Carter: the POTUS nearest to JFK?

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    On 7/23/2018 at 1:10 AM, W. Niederhut said:

    This reminded me of an experience I had in Boston in 1979 when I was a first year medical student.

    I was in the square at Faneuil Hall on the morning that Ted Kennedy announced his candidacy for the Presidency in November of 1979.

    The place was packed-- standing room only-- and loudspeakers were being used to broadcast Senator Kennedy's announcement speech to the rapt crowd standing in the square.

    As we were waiting for Mr. Kennedy to speak, an old, intoxicated man in a tattered coat staggered into the square, and was desperately trying to push his way through the tightly packed crowd to get to Faneuil Hall.

    When he saw the huge crowd, he blurted out, "Let me through!  I have to take a f--ing piss!"

    And some guy in the crowd said, "Oh, no! It's a Carter man!"

    Thanks for sharing. Found it really interesting 

    Michele Metta's new astonishing scoop: RFK Jr. is working on a new book on both Kennedy assassinations

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted · Edited by Paz Marverde

    https://medium.com/@pazmarverde/a-conversation-with-shane-osullivan-c059aa736d56

    A conversation with Shane O’Sullivan. The portrait of an excellent researcher giving us an astonishing scoop: RFK Jr. is writing a book on both Kennedy assassinations

    NOTE: This is the translation of an Italian article by Michele Metta. Original here

     
    1*LA9KsyKUbKAChZxb48zz4A.jpeg

    Today, I am going to interview Shane O’Sullivan. He is an Irish talented writer and filmmaker. He is in fact the author of a very important documentary, The Real Manchurian Candidate, on the assassination of Robert Kennedy. This movie received an endorsement by RFK Jr., son of RFK. O’Sullivan also wrote a very well-made book, Who Killed Bobby? The Unsolved Murder of Robert F. Kennedy. So, I am deeply honored he accepted to answer some questions. Let’s start.

    When and why did you decide to investigate the assassination of RFK?

    • I first heard about the case in 2004 and intended to adapt the story of two guns, a mysterious girl in a polka dress and a Manchurian Candidate assassin into a screenplay for a film. While researching the story, I discovered new evidence that led me to write a book and make a documentary instead.

    Sirhan Sirhan, a Palestinian, was the man caught in the afterwards of RFK’s killing, and the one declared guilty of the assassination. Anyway, if we do examine all the evidence, we realize facts are very different from what they seem. Which was Sirhan’s position at the moment of the shooting?

    • Witnesses placed the barrel of Sirhan’s gun between one and a half to five feet in front of Kennedy.

    And which was Sirhan arm position? I mean: its angle, its elevation.

    • Most witnesses, like Frank Burns, who was standing between Sirhan and Kennedy, described it as level with the ground.

    After how much time was Sirhan blocked?

    • Ambassador Hotel maître d’ Karl Uecker said he diverted Sirhan’s gun hand away from Kennedy after the second shot. Sirhan continued firing as Uecker slammed his gun hand against the steam table, trying to disarm him.

    The kind of gun used to kill RFK is so little it can easily disappear in a palm. Is this important, and why?

    • It may explain why the second gunman, with a similar small-gauge model to Sirhan’s Iver Johnson .22-caliber Cadet, could fire the fatal shot and escape, relatively undetected.

    What about the kind of bullets used that fatal night?

    • They were CCI Mini-Mag Hollow Point .22-caliber bullets. These hollow points were high-velocity bullets, which mushroomed on impact, expanding to cause maximum damage, explaining the devastation in the senator’s brain.

    What does the autopsy on RFK exactly establish?

    • The fatal shot was fired from an inch behind Kennedy’s right ear. Three other shots were fired from the same firing position. Two penetrated Kennedy’s right armpit. One of these lodged in his neck, the other exited his body and was lost in the ceiling interspace. A fourth shot entered and exited through the shoulder-pad of his coat without entering his body. All four shots were from a sharp upward angle, back-to-front, from behind and to the right.

    What can you tell us about Thane Eugene Cesar?

    • He was an Ace security guard hired to supplement the hotel security team that evening. He was behind Kennedy and to his right, holding the senator by the right elbow as he made his way through the pantry to a late-night press conference. At the time of the shots, he was in the firing position of the fatal shot described in the autopsy. He ducked, lost his balance, and fell back against the ice machines. He looked up to see the senator lying on his back right in front of him. During his fall, he lost his bow-tie, which can be seen beside Kennedy as he lies bleeding on the pantry floor. Cesar scrambled to his feet, pulled his gun, and moved to Kennedy’s side “to protect him from further attack.” Cesar claimed he was carrying a .38, not a .22, that night but his gun was never checked by the police. He had racist views and hated the Kennedys.

    Cesar stated that he sold his .22 you just talk about in your answer. A gun that we can all in all describe as an exact copy of Sirhan’s gun. There are various problems about his statement, are there not?

    • Cesar owned a H&R .22 caliber revolver that was a different model to Sirhan’s but was a similar size and had the same “rifling characteristics,” which means it was compatible with the key victim bullets in the case. Cesar said he sold this gun three months before the Kennedy shooting. In fact, he sold it three months after and told the buyer it had “been involved in a police shooting.”

    Witnesses exist stating that a security guard fired; that there was a “second gun” involved that night.

    • Don Schulman is the main witness to this. Ten minutes after the shooting, he gave his witness account to Jeff Brent, a friend of his, who was just outside the pantry when the shooting happened, reporting for Continental News Service.
    • When you listen to it at first, Schulman actually seems to say that the security guard hit Kennedy all three times, but later he stated that the Caucasian man who stepped out fired three times at Kennedy, hitting Kennedy all three times, and then the security guards fired back. This is how the “second gun” theory whose first father was a researcher called Ted Charach, was born: from this ninety-second recording.

    Who talked about a girl in a polka dot dress, and why this does matter?

    • Around eleven thirty, young Mexican American campaign worker Sandra Serrano went to sit outside on a fire escape to escape the heat of the lower ballroom. While she was out there, a man resembling Sirhan climbed the stairs past her with a pretty girl in a polka-dot dress and a Mexican American man in a gold sweater. “Excuse us,” the girl said, and Sandra made way as the three went up the stairs to the Embassy Ballroom. Shortly after the shooting, Serrano was still sitting on the fire escape below the southwest corner of the Embassy Ballroom. She heard what she thought was a car backfire six times; then the girl in the polka-dot dress and the Mexican American man in the gold sweater burst out onto the hotel fire escape and ran down the stairs, almost stepping on her.
    • “We’ve shot him! We’ve shot him!” the girl exclaimed. “Who did you shoot?” asked Sandra. “We’ve shot Senator Kennedy!” The girl seemed so excited about shooting Kennedy, Sandra went back inside in a state of shock.
    • Just over an hour later, she told her story live on NBC television and in the weeks that followed, was bullied by Hernandez, LAPD polygraph officer, into retracting her story. She never did and stands by her statement today.

    And we also have Di Pierro’s words.

    • Yes. Teenage waiter Vincent Di Pierro was in the pantry shortly before the shooting, standing level with the ice machines, five feet to the right of Kennedy. He noticed Sirhan in a powder blue jacket, white shirt, and light blue pants at the opposite end of the ice machine, twelve to fifteen feet away. He was standing up on a tray stacker “in a kind of funny position . . . like in a crouch — like if he were trying to protect himself from something. . . . I thought he was sick.”
    • “When I first saw him there was a girl behind him, too; I don’t know if you need that. There were two people that I saw.”
    • In fact, the only reason Di Pierro noticed Sirhan in the first place “was because there was this good-looking girl in the crowd there.” The girl and Shiran were really close each other, and Sirhan turned and smiled and seemed to say something to her or flirt with her, the waiter remembered.
    • Di Pierro described the girl as Caucasian, between twenty and twenty-four years old, at approximately the same eye level as Sirhan on the tray stacker, with dark brown hair to just above the shoulders, a little puffed up on one side, and a short, “pug” nose.
    • She wore a white dress with black or dark violet polka dots on it and a bib collar made of the same material as the dress. Her face wasn’t that pretty, “but I would never forget what she looked like because she had a very good-looking figure — and the dress was kind of lousy.”
    • He didn’t see her after the shooting.
    • The accounts of Serrano and Di Pierro establish that an attractive female “handler” in a white dress with black polka dots led Sirhan to the hotel, positioned him in the pantry, triggered him to start firing and then disappeared down the fire escape and has never been found. Rather than admit that, Hank Hernandez bullied Di Pierro into retracting his statement and closed the polka-dot dress investigation.

    These facts induce me to ask: how do you judge the police behavior in this case?

    • The LAPD desperately wanted to avoid the national embarrassment the Dallas Police Department had suffered after the deaths of JFK and Oswald in 1963. They shut down all leads suggesting a conspiracy by getting witnesses to undertake a polygraph examination with Lt. Enrique “Hank” Hernandez, who browbeat witnesses into retracting their statements. The LAPD suppressed their investigation files for twenty years and destroyed important evidence. LAPD criminalist Dewayne Wolfer was later harshly criticized for his work on the firearms evidence in the case. He claimed he matched the key victim bullets to Sirhan’s gun but this conclusion and the evidence he based it on were later found to be false.

    Paul Schrade was also hit along with Robert Kennedy, but he survived. Who is Schrade, what does he say now, and why is it so important?

    • Paul Schrade was a close friend of Bobby Kennedy and labor chair for his 1968 campaign. Schrade was walking six to eight feet behind Robert Kennedy when he was shot in the head by the first bullet (probably by Sirhan). He fell to the floor and was knocked out as the shooting continued but from 1974 onwards, he has called for a reinvestigation of the case because he believes more bullets were fired that night than Sirhan’s gun could hold. In 2016, he attended Sirhan’s parole hearing and apologized to the man who shot him for not supporting his release sooner. He believes Sirhan did not kill Bobby Kennedy and should be released.

    I recently interviewed Stephen Jaffe, a really preeminent member of Garrison’s staff, the New Orleans DA thanks whose courage in 1967 the investigation on the assassination of JFK revived. Answering to my questions, he reveled that he was the organizer of a very special secret rendezvousbetween RFK and Garrison himself, adding: “Before that meeting, I had a contact from a close friend of the Kennedy family who asked me to arrange the meeting. We also had help from another US Senator. RFK told Garrison in New York, at this very confidential meeting, that he was going to reopen the investigation into the assassination of President Kennedy but only after he was elected President. Only with that power, he explained, could he do so.” This very well pairs with a statement by RFK Jr. This one: “My father believed the Warren Report was a shoddy piece of craftsmanship. He publicly supported the Warren Commission report but privately he was dismissive of it. My father thought that somebody [else] was involved. The evidence at this point I think is very, very convincing that it was not a lone gunman.” Please, what do you think about this meeting and about this revelation by RFK Jr.?

    • This provides one of the motives for why he was killed.

    As I said in the beginning introducing you, your documentary received an endorsement by RFK Jr., a clear demonstration of how much important your work is. Did you also have any opportunity to talk with him directly?

    • No, but I’m in touch with people who are close to him. He’s writing a new book on both Kennedy assassinations that I hope will keep media attention on the RFK assassination and Sirhan’s case.

    Carter wanted to reopen the investigation on the assassination of JFK

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    42 minutes ago, Mark Knight said:

    Lost in all this talk of Carter wanting to reopen the JFK assassination investigation is the fact that the HSCA investigation was going on concurrently with the first half of the Carter administration.

    Or is this about Carter desiring a new investigation AFTER the HSCA investigation concluded?

    For what it seems, Carter wanted a Commission specifically dedicated to reopen the investigation on the assassination of JFK, or maybe an investigation by an attorney. In any case, your doubt is one of the reasons why I would like to know from that journalist what exactly were his words meaning 

×
×
  • Create New...