Benjamin Cole

Excellent review by JD. So, Kilgallen's Ruby/JFKA manuscripts disappear, the way the Enyart photos of the RFK1A disappear. BTW, oldies know that back then reporters collected paper notes in large manilla folders, sometimes accordion-style folders. How could a large clump of papers disappear?

JC-- For sure, there may have gunsels at more than one location at the Ambassador. But maybe it had been agreed that Cesar would attempt to steer RFK1 through the pantry.

Well, maybe not. But anyone can turn over a new leaf....

JD-- Thanks for posting this reminder of one of the great crimes of our time---the snuff job on the JFK Records Act. Surely, this is one issue everyone in the EF-JFKA can agree upon. There is no excuse for suffocating the records now. But, as pointed out in the excellent article by Mark Adamczyk, there is no penalty for what has happened to the JFK Records Act. Perhaps what Trump and Carlson say is true: The remaining records would indeed illuminate the CIA's role in the JFKA, and who knows?---maybe possibly in the RFK1A too.

Lisa Pease wrote the book on the topic, which is recommended. I disagree with Pease on a few issues and events, but hey, her book is the Bible from which we can converse.

TBH, I have mixed feelings about this one. To be sure, I suspect Cesar shot RFK1. That does not exonerate Sirhan. It may be he shot at RFK1 to the best of his ability. To exonerate Sirhan, one must strongly suspect he was not responsible for his actions. But Sirhan told told David Frost in 1989, recorded and filmed, that he shot RFK1 due to the Senator's support for Israel. That was consistent with what Sirhan had written in his notebook. Others say Sirhan was programmed. This gets into a very speculative area. I wonder if Sirhan was manipulated, more than programmed. Others determined Sirhan would agree to shoot the Senator and prepped him to do it. But Sirhan wanted to shoot RFK1. As stated, for me the RFK1A, the second shooter, and the cover-up that followed, is an important clue to the truth behind the JFKA. Who could do a snuff job on the RFK1A investigation? That answer seems to again point back to the US intel state. I will grant that Sirhan probably does not know of the plot that enveloped him. He likely thought he was acting alone.

RO- I too am mystified that somehow the RFK1A topic is now being divorced from the EF-JFKA, when for decades anyone who posted of the RFK1A was accepted into the mainbar. IMHO, the two topics are twinned, and have always been treated as twin topics. The true perps behind the JFKA and the RFK1A may be the same people--that is, quoting Mickey Spillane, "not who pulled the trigger, but who paid for the bullets." IMHO, it may be time for a fresh start, new moderation.

DH-- Ditto on Pat Speer. I might disagree with Pat Speer on gunshot residue on LHO cheek. So what? Speer has done serious work. We might disagree on a particular issue. Big deal. Maybe I am wrong. My 2 cents on IMHOs: We should, all of us, try for collegial conversation. One way to disagree is to say something like, "Well, we are on different pages on this one. My take is....." In the EF-JFKA, most points of debate...well, there really is not one side that is "wrong." Sure, if I insist JFK was shot on 11.23.... In any event, sometimes forums just need a breath of fresh air, a new team, so old hard feelings are released. IMHO, a fresh moderation team at EF-JFKA is in order.

RM- Thanks for posting. Yes, Stone thought LBJ was behind the JFKA. I think I read Stone's book way back when. As stated, something tells me the RFK1A and the JFKA are linked...the first mandated the second. We are on different pages on this one. But that is what the EF-JFKA is for, to see and appreciate other viewpoints.

I like Matt. I think he is an earnest and deeply intelligent JFKA'er. Matt does wear his politics on his sleeve, and would have to bend over backwards to accommodate people with different points of view than his. Roger Odisio perhaps is another candidate. It is odd that there were lengthy and extended threads on the RFK1A in the EF-JFKA mainbar (Eastabrooks, Dr Brown etc.) until I started do do some original research on the topic, and a few posts. Then the RFK1A topics were moved off the mainbar. Hitherto, the RFK1A has always been considered part and parcel of the EF-JFKA for abundant and obvious reasons. Examples like that raise questions about the need for fresh moderation.

RM- Thanks for your question. As stated, Sturgis said the Watergate event was part of a plot to unseat Nixon, as Nixon had been demanding files pertaining to the JFKA. That is my reason for posting here. As for Sturgis' credibility...very dicey.

MA- I have not e-mailed James Gordon, and I never have. I am not a MAGA supporter, or even Trump supporter, or even a Republican, despite the many, many statements made by others that I am. BTW, within EF-JFKA, MAGA supporters should treated in the same gracious, collegial and civil manner that Biden supporters, or RFK1 supporters, or independents, should receive. The EF-JFKA, and its participants should try to be inclusive., and not stigmatize those with other perspectives. We are on different pages on this issue of the need for fresh moderators, and that is fine. IMHO, with emotions so ragged, then probably a fresh start, and new moderation, is needed.

Probably time for a fresh start, a new set of moderators, if any can be found. I do not criticize anybody. I am concerned that strong political and personal biases have crept into the EF-JFKA picture. The EF-JFKA should accept the full range of the political spectrum (excepting overt hate speech), and the EF-JFKA should discourage personal diatribes. The EF-JFKA, and its participants, should be tolerant of various views of the JFKA, and the RFK1A. No need for personal sniping. Try a comment such as, "Well, we are on different pages on this one," or something to that effect. Every effort should be made to encourage collegial conversation. Unfortunately, even moderators have occasionally sunk to personal insults, when one participant did not agree with their points of view. A housecleaning would allow a fresh start, under some solid guidelines regarding political biases (which we all have) and personal insults.

Interesting. I am certainly open to the idea that the political assassinations of the 1960s were linked, in the sense the true animating impulse came from the US intel state. There may have been the use of cat's paws or cut-outs. For me, the most direct follow-on assassination to the JFKA would be the RFK1A, for the aforementioned reasons---the intel state had to do a snuff job on any potential intrepid JFKA investigation, and had to prevent US foreign-military policy into RFK1's hands. I assent to your sentiments that ugly racial/religious bigotry has no place in the EF-JFKA. With your last name I guess you have seen your share of ugly bigotry, though you are a Catholic, also a very good group of people. I have long admired the Catholic pursuit of charity, which I witnessed in many Los Angeles area organizations during my five decades in that city. The Catholics (at least of Los Angeles) are also outstanding in the sense they welcome everyone into their churches and facilities, seemingly without the slightest blush of racism or ethnocentricity.

Was LHO programmed? There are some indications, though hardly certain, that Sirhan was operating in something of a fugue, or hypnotic state, when he fired at RFK1. Some observers contend Sirhan had been "programmed" to fire at RFK1 on June 5, 1968. But could have LHO also been programmed? Indeed this was a CIA talking point for a while. "There is the 'Manchurian Candidate Theory,' which was supported by CIA men at one point: that Oswald had been brainwashed to become an assassin during his three-year self-exile in Russia." https://content.time.com/time/subscriber/article/0,33009,843078-2,00.html There is also this book: Programmed to Kill: Lee Harvey Oswald, the Soviet KGB, and the Kennedy Assassination Hardcover – November 2, 2007 by Ion Mihai Pacepa (Author) ---30--- Of course, we cannot say one programming (Sirhan/RFK1A) was possible, but the other programming (LHO/JFKA) is impossible. There are some similarities: 1. Observers after the RFK1A described Sirhan as unusually calm, and eerie, while observers after the JFKA describe LHO as unusually calm and cocky. 2. Both Sirhan and LHO had practiced with weapons prior to the RFK1A or the JFKA, through not for any particular reason. That is, neither were hunters, or security guards etc. They seemed to practice compulsively, as if by command. However, in terms of motives, there is a difference. LHO seemed to have no motive for the JFKA...making the prospect of a programming more plausible. LHO did not want to kill JFK, but was programmed. The programming explains inexplicable behavior. Sirhan evidently had a motive for killing RFK1, and that was the Senator's support for Israel. Oddly, if true, this means the idea Sirhan was programmed could be just mumbo-jumbo. Sirhan wanted to kill RK1 (though still used as a cat's paw by others). Side note: Was LHO's trip to Mexico City to receive a refresher treatment in the Russian Embassy? Or unrelated entirely? Interesting topic.

MK- There is an "ignore" feature you can use, so you do not have to see the offensive comments of some participants.

Frank Sturgis was an actual participant in the Watergate job, a long-time CIA asset, and the opposite of a George McGovern supporter. You may wish to consider his views.

The opening segments of this Mark Groubert presentation feature an old c. 1977 interview of Frank Sturgis, the CIA operative and Watergate burglar. See Spartacus for a rundown on Sturgis. https://spartacus-educational.com/JFKsturgis.htm Long before James Hougan's excellent book on Watergate came out in 1984 (Secret Agenda: Watergate, Deep Throat and the CIA) Sturgis is laying out the "real" reasons why Nixon is getting booted from the White House---in part, the CIA does not like Nixon demanding to see the Bay of Pigs files and the truth about the JFKA. This tension between Helms of the CIA and Nixon regarding the "Bay of Pigs files" later became documented with the release of the Nixon White House tapes. Sturgis also names Alexander Butterfield, E. Howard Hunt and Haig as CIA assets inside the White House---all points more-or-less assented to today, but not back then. Bob Woodward is the willing media side of the equation. Of course, the names Hunt and Sturgis also come up in various versions of the JFKA, with Hunt late in life stating he was on a back-up team in Dallas. Sturgis was regarded as a notoriously unreliable source and observer. So like everything about the JFKA or RFK1A, a wilderness of mirrors. My take-away is the the CIA, or intel-state, will depose Presidents they do not like, whether by force or otherwise.

RB- Thanks for your comments. Obviously, at this late date it difficult to prove anything. IMHO: But to have Sirhan armed with a pistol firing blanks seems like a huge risk. 1. If bystanders had seized Sirhan only moments earlier, there would have been blanks left in the pistol. That would raise questions, to put it mildly. Maybe the LAPD would cover that up too, but it seems like a gigantic risk. 2. The wild pattern of shots in the pantry seems to validate the idea that Sirhan was spraying shots around, as bystanders wrestled for control of the weapon. 3. There are no shots that entered RFK1 from the front of his body. Only from the rear. So, the purported second gunman fired randomly at the crowd and ceiling? 4. It is true, there was a fleeting risk to Cesar during the RFK1A event. Cesar might be in the line of fire from Sirhan, although that is hardly certain. But Cesar had two advantages. He knew what was coming, and could use RFK1 as a shield, which he did. My guess is the RFK1A plan was that Cesar was to return fire at Sirhan, possibly killing Sirhan and RFK1 (the latter by "mistake"). But when the smoke cleared, Cesar realized he was scot-free. Cesar's work may have been hazardous. I knew a guy that drove trucks in wartime Iraq for $170k a year. He figured it was 1 in 10 that he would not come home. Guys go down into coal mines for a lot less.

PB--thanks again for your comments. Yes, the LAPD's tests on RFK1's clothing seem to have disappeared between the cracks. No doubt Noguchi ran an earnest and skilled autopsy. Nevertheless, just one type of test by one expert...well, doubts can exist, in this case or any case. The LAPD test was an entirely different type of examination and procedure, by another party---and came to the same conclusion: RFK1 was shot at nearly point-blank range. If one says, "Well each test is likely accurate at 10-to-1 odds," then we reach the 100-to-1 odds level that RFK1 was indeed shot at vert close range. To give Lisa Pease her due, perhaps she acknowledges the separate LAPD test in her excellent volume, and she has 850 footnotes in that book, and who knows what is contained therein. It has been a while since I read her book.

M- I agree, Israel had nothing to do with the JFKA or RFK1A. Some of the people touting such perspectives are likely Jew- and Israel-haters. But some may be just enthralled with an idea, the same way there are some who posit the Mormon Mafia perped the JFK. ---30--- Regarding friendly fire incidents. During WWII, the Gela incident--- "It seemed as though every Allied gun battery on the Sicily beachhead and offshore was blowing (American) C-47s and C-53s out of the sky. The US Army’s own official history reads, “The slow-flying, majestic columns of aircraft were like sitting ducks.” Dozens of transport planes were hit. One exploded in midair. Others, on fire, tried to ditch to save the paratroopers. At the time, the shoot-down over Gela was the worst friendly-fire incident in US history. Three hundred eighteen American soldiers were killed or wounded. Twenty-three transport planes failed to return; others limped back to Tunisia badly damaged, one riddled with 1,000 holes; many landed with blood all over their floorboards. Brigadier General Charles L. Keerans, Jr., the 82nd Airborne’s assistant commander, was aboard a plane that was lost at sea. Why did Americans kill so many of their own over Sicily?" ---30--- Yes, it is true, US gunners shot 23 US transport airplanes out of the sky. Not one or two. US planes that were taking a prescribed route, and were identifiable as US airplanes. The scholars say globally about 20% of casualties in war are friendly fire. Pilots and soldiers feel adrenaline, make mistakes, or some are just poor soldiers. If you ever worked in a large organization, you know there are also a clump of guys you would not trust to run a McDonalds or drive a school bus. So it goes.

PM--My apols! I know nothing about Mark Chapman, but as they say...keep an open mind.

Well, since we are posting personal remembrances... I got the LA Times from the driveway and showed my mother the headline. RFK Shot. She already knew, of course, but seeing the deadline, she took off her glasses and wiped her face.

PB--- Thanks for your collegial comment. I concur with you. I felt compelled to present additional evidence, found through original research, that RFK1 was shot at close range.

KB- 1. It seems unlikely that Israel would want to assassinate not one but both strong, high-profile proponents of Israel. 2. It seems doubly unlikely that Israel had ties into the LAPD to enable and effect a cover-up. The whole point of my series on the RFK1A is that we see again a cover-up of a high-profile important assassination, five years later, and in a different jurisdiction. A lot of the same stuff too---bullet-slugs that had ID marks, marks that disappear, but nevertheless are accepted as evidence. IMHO, a Russia, a Cuban government, the Mob, and a tiny country like Israel does not have the resources and staying power to pull that off. The US intel community has that kind of resources.