±«Óătv

Thanks for emailing it to me!

I was very interested in watching this but I was actually flying back from the UK last night and missed it!

This way I had the chance to see it!

Wonderful idea to give us a chance to see reports like this the next day!

Thanks, again!

Katy, NL

Oh please, I know people find it hard to accept that 'unbalanced' people with guns all of there own decision kill people, and sometimes they are important people, but are Newsnight really going to start reporting each "new" piece of evedence in the Kennedy assassinations that comes along. Wake me up if you get a signed confession, otherwise stick to reporting current affairs.

Yes, I firmly believe in the report and suspected the same all along

A couple of points: O'Sullivan (and Sirhan Sirhan's lawyer)quoted a number of eye-witnesses as saying that Sirhan did fire at Bobby Kennedy, albeit from a position that did not fit the apparent trajectory of the fatal bullet(s). If that is the case, what happened to the bullets that Sirhan fired? 2. If Sirhan fired but did not fire the fatal bullets, are we expected to believe that -- by amazing coincident!! -- he fired his shot(s) at precisely the same time as the shots that did indeed kill Kennedy? 3. Did the FBI carry out any ballistics tests to see whether the bullets that killed Kennedy came from the same (or same kind of) gun that Sirhan used? 4. Are there no eye-witness accounts of the (non-Sirhan) firing? If not, how would O'Sullivan explain that? 5.Why didn't Jeremy Paxman ask questions about the ballistics?

Best,

Jeff Phillips

Although the evidence shown was compelling enough with regard to the identities of the CIA agents, O'Sullivan could no little more than extrapolate upon the operatives personal dislike of the Kennedy family, and the Bay of Pigs link. This was less of a theory, and more a CIA version of Friends Reunited.

This was a fascinating report. Considering the official explanation of RFK's assassination--that he was shot in the back of the head by a man who was in front of him--is impossible, it's quite right that people should be asking the questions that O'Sullivan does. Excellent!

Shane O'Sullivan highlighted the point that three FBI men, certainly not friendly to Kennedy, were present. The ease of highlighting his 'lacking in any real understanding of this event' surely rests with explaining what they were doing there.
It would appear that the background research on this event has been very detailed. It must therefore be fair to assume that the presence of these men has also been suitably explained - so what's the answer?

Shane, you silly!

With the evidence and the presence of the two CIA agents it is compelling. The CIA will of course deny it. An anology would be a small child found next to a broken vase claiming it was like that when they found it. We all know the kids lying but the child we never admit it. Not unless the kid is George Washington and let's face it how many poeple in US govt are as honest as that old boy.

It's an interesting point in psychology when it comes to what we accept and reject in that area known as "conspiracy".

Jeremy Paxman sensibly introduced tonight's RFK piece with: "the violent deaths of prominent people...routinely attract conspircacy theories."

They do. It is also true that there is a tendency to do the reverse - routinely dismiss them. I confess to be among those who - perhaps like Jermemy - cringe at the very word "conspiracy", yet recognise that sometimes they happen.

Today we appear to be caught between these two competing mindsets: gravitating to conspiracy theories and avoiding them. Not surprisingly, in the world of journalism, the last thing you want is to be caught on the wrong side of a conspiracy argument, however much you mistrust your government.

I haven't forgotten that Gavin Estler narrated the JKF assasination documentary "Beyond Conspiracy" shown in 2003. Gavin covered himself quite well in this regard. You may remember that this program concluded that, when all was said and done, the Warren Commission had got it right. Without going into whether I agree with that conclusion, I will say that there was a lot missing from this documentary.

Gavin's program was an example of being psychologically immersed in the "avoid conspiracy" mindset. One question it asked was: "Is it conceivable, in an open democracy with such a free press, that we could not know the truth by now."

Again, this directly appealed to the side of us that cringes at the concept of conspiracy. By the end it left viewers with the impression that conspiracy nuts had got their way on JFK for so long that it was time to lay this to rest - and frankly used only evidence which could do this. In challenging the close-minded pro-conspiracy mindset - which also exists - we could almost forget that there ever was a genuine contraversy based on conflicts in evidence.

I'm curious whether Gavin has actually changed his mind since then.

Yes do I share Shane O'Sullivan's suspicions, both about Robert and John Kennedy's murders. If it comes to that, I might even share some of Oliver Stone's. At the same time I don't wish to find myself on the wrong side of a conspiracy theory.

The lesson here is to beware of the conspiracy mindset but also the anti-conspiracy mindset - both of which can have a tendency to dull our critical faculties. Discovering the truth of any event may mean setting aside psychological preference to confront what actually happened. It can also often mean accepting that we may never find out what happened.

Simon

Everything is possible in the third dimension.

The bay of pigs fiasco was of the (Kennedy's) making and left a lot of sour grapes amongst the security services and the Cuban refugee groups in Miami.

OH and by the way. The original assasin had been hired, issued with a gun firing blanks which he was not aware of, thereby not putting the real assasin at risk of injury and bobs your uncle.

Everything is possible in the third dimension.

The events concerning the "Bay of Pigs" fiasco, was as a result of the Kennedy about face on policy, which was never forgiven by certain sectors of the American security services and not forgetting the Cuban refugee movement based in Miami.

So yes I believe the report you refer to could well be factual

I am not convinced as to Shane O'Sullivan's 'new' evidence, for example he did not mention any conspiricy between Siran-Siran and the two CIA agents. Where was the connection? Even if like Oswald, Siran was a 'patsy', there would have to be some sort of communication between the three of them (Siran & agents).
I do however believe, again like his brother, Bobby Kennedy did not die at the hand of a lone palestinian nutter, for of all the American politicians of that era, Robert Kennedy was surely a friend of Palestine.
It also beggars belief that at the beginning of the 1960s, three of the most radical men in American politics were young and very much alive namely, John F Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, and Martin Luther king. All three were murdered before the decade was complete. Coincidence? Please don't insult my intelligence.

Thr report by Shane O'Sullivan giving revelations of the presence of three CIA Agents at the scene of Robert Kennedy's assasination adds to the mounting eveidence that it is certainly NOT conspiratorial to suggest the complicity obvious to many of us from the outset of the US Establishment - namely the giant US Corporations and the Military/Industrial Complex in the assasinations of both Jack and Bobby Kennedy.
History will no doubt reveal that US Corporate Power will stop at nothing in their goal of total global US hegemony. Assasinations are just the 'tip of the iceburg' - just look at the killings of innocent people all over the globe - starting with Middle East and Afganistan. As always it is about the control of people economicaaly for their resources. Look at the history of Latin America where once it was the European powers, it has been from the beggining of the 20th Century the U.S.A.
When the "bogey man" of the U.S.S.R was no more they had to create a new bogey man given to them on a plate by Islamic fundamentalism. These two forces are feeding off eachother with even the possibility of working together - as US involvement in 9/11 has yet to be revealed.

It is interesting how the so called "war on terror" conveniently overlooks the U.S.'s own terrorists such as Louis Passada Carrilles a former CIA Agent fomenting terrorism in the sovereign states of Cuba and Venezuela - and who is now being protected by the US government.
Then there was the CIA sponsered assasination of Salvador Allende in Chile - the list is endless.
Am I anti-American ? Certainly not.
The people of the USA are mainly good people as are all of mankind. Their government however is particularly nasty and dangerous.
When the US people finally throw off their system of society - and they will - they will be doing themselves and mankind a very great service !

I do believe I spotted quite a few in the crowd with crooked fourth fingers, and whilst not 100% sure I do believe I also spotted someone who looks like architect David Vincent, or was it Roy Thinnes !
Let JF and Bobby finally rest in peace, PLEASE.

Why is the idea that Robert Kennedy was murdered by his own people such a surprise! Even the US Governments Warren Commission admitted that his brother was murdered as a result of a conspiracy! And now, we have an even greater problem where the powers that be demolish sky scrapers in the middle of New York - and despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary all we get is a conspiracy of silence. No wonder people are wandering away from the mainstream media in order to source current events/News!

From this distance it seems impossible that a person with the characteristics, policies and morality of Richard Nixon was elected President of the United States. In one way or another, quite a few contenders must have been cleared out of his path.

Surely the biggest contender to Nixon was RFK - then, within the blink of an eye, he wasn't.

Conspiracy or not, the questions are worth asking and Shane's film deserves a response. It won't get it of course.

There's nothing better than a good old conspiracy yarn.

How long until we see a report on the death of John Kennedy Jr?

Go on...you know you want to !

Well done Newsnight...at least it made a change from your usual content of hum drum politics, economic forecasts and social commentary.

I have read a couple of biographies on the life of RFK and it is obvious that he made a number of enemies throughout his years as Attorney General serving for his brother JFK. I have always firmly believed that there was no lone shooter involved and this very insightful report gives an indication that all was not quite what it seemed that fateful night in the Ambassador Hotel. My belief is that the war mongers needed to make sure that RFK would not set foot in the office of the presidency or there may have been an earlier withdrawal from Vietnam. This would have meant the loss of $billions in war contracts.
RFK also made enemies in those who did not favour equality between black and white americans. I hope there is a follow up documentary on the subject. I agree that RFK had his faults like any man, but he would have made a great President and would have brought about the kind of change that Americans would still be benefitting from today.

I'm a conspiracy theory beleiver with regard to JFK. I have studied much of the evidence and read many of the books. I don't think there's a sane person alive who given the wealth of evidence can deny that Oswald was assisted in his assasination plot. Gavin Estlers anti conspiracy program was a poor attempt at scotching theories that are now accepted as fact by many of those who have studied the material.

With RFK I have more difficulty. The nub of the conspiracy theorists case, as I understand it, is that Sirhan was hypnotised into a trance like state. He then fired blanks at RFK to cover shots, possibly from a silenced gun, by the real assasin.

Big hole there, if you've got him hypnotised, why risk an important man with a silencer when Sirhan could do the job with real bullets? Now if the theory was just that I could accept it. It's accepted that both JFK and RFK were a thorn in the side of the FBI, Christian right wing America, the Rebublican Party, corporate America, the Mafia and the arms trade. They had few friends in the establishment.

Oliver Stones film, whilst widely criticised even by ardent conspiracy theorists at least comes to the right conclusion. It's not important that there was another gunman at the JFK assasination, it's why there was and who put him there. The same is true with RFK's murder. It doesn't matter that Sirhan did it, the question more importantly is why.

Get real. The people in charge and a part of our "intelligence services" don't give a damn about human life, they are all psycopathic killers, ..... 007 doesn't have any qualms about killing and neither does 001. Why anyone should doubt that both Kennedy killings were instigated by the US government simply astounds me. If they treat Iraqis or "slope heads" or any of the others with contempt do you really think they'd treat you any differently unless you could do the same to them 10,000 times over, ...... an adult knows the world they live in. As the "Prime Minister" in "Love Actually" said "The SAS are absolutely charming, ..... ruthless trained killers are only a phone-call away", ..... or a wish away.

Seeing it is the conspiracy season again how about LBJ (ask your father) or if that doesn't suit what about his dog Yuki. I mean did anybody do a background check on that dog? It raises a lot of questions as yet unanswered.

Yours Richard

Well done the ±«Óătv for airing the piece! It goes some way to redressing belief in a broadcaster that lost its balance when screening the weak 'documentary' narrated by Gavin Esler on the JFK murder.
In response to #22 above, it wasn't the Warren Commission that concluded "probable conspiracy" in relation to JFK, but the House Select Committe on Assassinations.

Mel Ayton obviously has much more knowledge on this subject than most, but whatever the flaws and assumptions put forward in Shane O'Sullivan's film, does he dismiss the central premise of the film? To my mind, O'Sullivan hasn't said that a CIA operative shot and killed RFK. He simply has said that he has a positive ID on three CIA men who were in the building that night - the public, including conspiracy theorists, will draw their own conclusions. Mel - are you saying that those operatives were not there, or that they have been mis-identified?

The assassination of the Kennedy brother's are both tainted with the federal government involvement. This looks particularly bad for a nation that pride itself on liberty and democracy. I think that American needs to wake up to a new reality and understand what is actually happening in their backyard.

However, all nations need to unite but with a deferred judgement, so that we do not polarize our views about race and religion.

Peace and freedom.

Dee

Conspiracy theories have long been with us. In Britain,I am Scottish, the babes in the tower killings come to my mind. Like most people, I hope, I found this interesting, but my problem is that these sort of things tend always to deal with "celebrity killings".
Yes, there should possibly be a thorough investigation of the possibilities, but, would not there also be a strong case for investigating all those on death row who avow their innocence? Yes, I know, if you strike lucky, it would make you famous/rich. Investigating "Celebrity deaths", whatever the outcome, gets you instant attention.
It is laudable that this investigator works so hard.
Even more laudable were they to work on non-celebrities.
Such is life

The assassination of the Kennedy brother's are both tainted with the federal government involvement. This looks particularly bad for a nation that pride itself on liberty and democracy. I think that American needs to wake up to a new reality and understand what is actually happening in their backyard.

However, all nations need to unite but with a deferred judgement, so that we do not polarize our views about race and religion.

Peace and freedom.

Dee

If RFK was hit by a bullet which could not have come from Sirhan, then I am convinced further explanations need seeking out. The leading question seems to be to confirm the identity of the 3 alleged CIA agents and find out why they were there.

I am always puzzled at the Kennedy family in this regard. They must have disgust at the exploitative sicko tendencies. But when there seems to be autopsy evidence to clear Sirhan and suspicious circumstances you would have thought they would want to flush out the truth as they are still players.

I seem to remember Newsnight rubbishing a US ex-intelligence Major (nice guy met him in Liverpool) on JFK some years ago. Time for an apology?

Could this be YET ANOTHER hard-up journalist trying to make a quick name for himself? He IS entitled to his opinions, but, should investigate deeper BEFORE making allegations of wrongdoing, especially the ballistic evidence.

The first thing RFK would have done as President, would have been a root and branch investigation into the circumstances behind his brother's death, and, as President he'd have had the authority to get to the bottom of it.

JFK was assasinated 3 weeks after he signalled that the Vietnam conflict was not going to be escalated, RFK as soon as his nomination as the Democrat Presidential candidate was confirmed, and that he would similarly find a way to stop the war.

The question, then as now, everyone should ask is "Who benefits?"

Shane O'Sullivan's report was a shoddy piece of work which had no place on Newsnight. There wasn't a single piece of evidence in his report and he even had the cheek to reheat the "conspiracy" of JFK's assasination. The ±«Óătv showed an excellent documentary on JFK's killing last year in which every conspiracy claim was knocked down. It was a lone gunman afterall. Don't think Mr O'Sullivan has much of a future in investigative journalism if this is the best he can do.

The jar that the CIA guy was carrying was probably the bullets from Kennedy

I am not convinced that a second man was involved in the Bobby Kennedy assassination, but I am convinced there needs to be more investigation.

However, as the CIA are involved, I am not sure how much that would achieve. My question is more around why both Kennedy assassinations would appear to have such wasteful duplication of effort, if I can put it in such a glib way.

Why have the coincidences of the same person being killed in the same time and place by different persons?

Isn't the real issue here using 3rd parties to do the security forces' dirty work for them ? If the CIA could manipulate someone to shoot Bobby Kennedy then they wouldn't need to risk getting personally involved in the shooting. Isn't that the real story which needs to be looked into here, rather than the possible presence of a 2nd gunman?

Even if there were a second gun, my view is that the real story is who was really behind pulling the first gun's trigger. It is that issue which Shane O'Sullivan's film has really highlighted, by showing very convincing evidence that the CIA were present - even if he cannot prove [to my mind] that they were the murderers of Bobby Kennedy.

It seems odd how often there is some sort of alleged conspiracy, over the Kennedy family. All the furore over JFK and his death, and now the killing of his brother. The evidence shown in this report, does seem a bit sketchy, I mean how do we know so much about the three guys in the frame. Is this yet another opportunity for someone to make a film on the back of this information. I have no doubt there will be no conclusion to this story, it will disappear into histroy as have many other versions.

I believe that one of the CIA agent killed Robert Kennedy, during that time United States government and CIA were against Kennedy's family because Kennedy's were always supporting African Americans and other minorities groups for their values, freedom, justice and human rights.!!!!

There seems to be an awful lot of muddled thinking on this blog.
The JFK programme fronted by Gavin Essler was an absolute travesty of evidence with reheated stuff from the earliest days following the JFK assassination that has long since been discredited by hard evidence. Take, for example, the proposition that John Connally's lapel flips open as the bullet strikes, thus "proving" that the magic bullet was possible. Look at JC's jacket (it's still around), the bullet hole is nowhere near the lapel. This was just one of dozens of hopeless claims made in the film.

It has also been written that JFK did a volte face on the Bay of Pigs and this brought him the emnity of the military, the Cuban exiles and every element of the right. He never did. He was always entirely consistent on insisting that there would be no air support from the US for the plan. Further, the plan was conceived during Eisenhower's presidency by...Richard Nixon! Kennedy was a couple of months in office and had been assured by the CIA that it would work, even though they knew American air support was essential to success. He trusted them and they let him down. When it failed he stood up in front of the press and took the responsiblity (imagine Blair doing that!). Only in private did he seek to sort out the CIA, thus creating another enemy.

Another post states that the accoustic evidence that led the House Select Committee on Assassinations to conclude that JFK died as a result of a conspiracy was "flawed". The evidence was not flawed at all. It was later discovered that there was the possibility that the sounds heard on the dictabelt could have been over dubbed by a jumpy recording needle, or "crosstalk" on the tape, but this did not invalidate the original conclusions, it merely gave other possible, very unlikely explanations for why the belt apparently recorded more than three shots. Dr James Barger, the original accoustics expert, stood by everything that he first claimed in giving 95% certainty that there were more than three shots.

What hasn't been mentioned is that the HSCA was just about hijacked by the CIA. Richard Sprague was hounded out of the Committee and his replacement, Robert Blakey, was little more than a stooge. He even admitted as much years later, claiming he had been too trusting with the CIA. Only a few years before the HSCA reported, Robert Helms, head of the CIA in the early seventies, had perjured himself before the Church Committee. He was convicted, fined, set free and treated as a hero by his fellow operatives. Blakey's HSCA lame conclusions that the JFK assassination was a result of a mob led conspiracy in which Oswald fired the only target hitting shots was laughable in the face of so much evidence that points to other conclusions, but it put paid to proper investigation of the sixties assassinations for ever. Now it is probably too late to get to the real truth about JFK, RFK and MLK, just about everyone involved has died.

This is not a post to convince anyone about conspiracy, it is put up to make clear that, on evidence, so much of what we were told by the Warren Commission and the HSCA just doesn't add up. Everytime a new programme or book comes out from some nutter who claims he pulled the trigger or witnessed the killing or overheard something in a bar somewhere we get another conspiracy theory that takes us further from the truth and does a little more to discredit those intelligent, hard working individuals who know we have not been told correctly about these events and who try, against the odds to get official channels to look properly at the cases. Equally, everytime we get a Posner or an Essler type production that confirms the nonsense of Warren and Blakey, we move further away from the truth.

No doubt Shane O'Sullivan is doing his best to a) get to the truth and b) make a living, but like all the scenarios put forward by private investigators, his evidence is framentary and open to interpretation. I wish him well, I really do, but only an official investigation will ever properly explain what happened in the sixties.

A great deal of misunderstanding occurs on both sides of this case stemming from either a lack of knowledge or an unwillingness to relinquish preconceived notions of what occured in the ambassador hotel.

As some previous posts have shown many are not well versed in the facts surrounding the case and make out of hand statements in a somewhat willy nilly fashion. This said however the fact of the matter is that sufficient evidence or lack thereof relevant to this case means that it is far from an open and shut case .

The evidence presented by Mr.O'Sullivan should be given due consideration and this is by no means the end of the matter. Clarification of the identifications will be sought by other former CIA affiliates in order to prove or disprove the ids provided.

With regards to Mel Aytons remarks on the matter I echo his sentiments that people need to gain a more in depth understanding of the matter. I do feel that Mr.Ayton may be basing his assertions that these are not the CIA agents in question. It should be noted that the identifications are made by associates of the men and not photographic analysis by outsiders.

I would hope that the bbc will commission another documentary by Shane O'Sullivan in order to give clarification on the matter.

John Geraghty

I was a student during the 1960's heavily involved in world affairs. My ability to form my own views also stood proud above the repetitious material taught at college. I can remember where I was standing when JFK was shot but I cannot remember where I was when Bobby became the target. I blame their father for their deaths because it is known that the father's wealth came from the underworld dealings and when the Kennedy family sought to and did change their clothes for a cleaner America, the underworld and agents from within America's own Central Government agencies set course to destroy the Kennedys. The Warren Commission was a white wash. Whilst I thought Lee Harvey Oswald was responsible for JFK's killing (I believe mass produced by the USA) for many, many years I have held Central Government agencies and the underworld for JFK's death, for Bobby's death, for the assassination of Martin Luther King and for the murder of Oswald. I have many videos on the Kennedys including the Z Tape of the moment of JFK's assassination. End.

I believe that Robert Kennedy was the great political figure of the past 50 years. Despite enduring the pain of the death of his brother, and, he offered people the hope of a new form of politics - compassion for our fellow human beings. A tragic figure, he can hardly be painted as anything but flawed - but he realised that he had the propensity to be wrong. He demonstrated this with his changed perception of the problems facing America in Vietnam. He was a political rarity in that in word and in deed you sensed the man truly cared about the plight of the underprivilaged and discarded souls of humanity.

It is for that reason that whoever was complicit in his death should hang their head in shame.

CIA would probably routinely keep tabs on senior political figures. It's not beyond belief to think that they were complicit in one way or another, but the evidence, especially as obfuscated by 40 years of rumour, speculation, and conspiracy, is circumstantial, and sadly, 40 years too late in the presenting.

It is quite possible that the CIA was behind the assasination of Kennedy as CIA is just as unscrupulous as the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam - LTTE - of Sri Lanka. They would not hesitate to bump off their own if it helps the cause as shown by the recent assasination of MP Nadarajah Raviraj and some years ago the PM of India, Rajiv Gandhi who vehemently supported them and who was the son of Indira Gandhi whio spawned them to destabalise the Sri Lankan Govt.

How strange to think that Bobby K and his brother would be in their 80's now.
Watching the footage, the man makes Bush look like one of the pilgrim fathers.
Imagine the free world churning out leaders so forward and bold thinking today!
I think the ghost of Marylin Monroe shot him - my book is coming out for Christmas!
I hope for an investigation all the same.

We will never know the absolute truth so to completely deny the conspiracy theory or lone gunman explanation regarding the deaths of JFK, RFK and MLK is wrong. But on balance which is more likely? If say the CIA/Texas oil men/mafia/Cuban exiles (whoever you want) killed one it makes it more likely that they killed more than one (if you kill JFK why not RFK also).
So Jack Ruby, a member of the mafia, (who knew Oswald) killed him because he wanted to spare Jackie Kennedy the trauma of a trial (PLEASE).
Oswald learnt Russian in the Marines, worked in Japan on U2s, defected telling the Americans he would tell the Russians all he knew, becomes disillusioned with communism receives money from the US government to return with Russian wife (with an uncle in the KGB). He is not charged with high treason. Associates with known exCIA members and right wing organizations, whilst pretending to be a supporter of Castro et c.

Putting to one side the crime scene evidence this "lone" gunman has a remarkably colourful past. This isn't like Regan's attempted assassin who did it to try and impress Jodie Foster. Now that is a good old fashioned lone gunman. If JFK was killed by a carpet salesman who did it to impress Marilyn Monroe I could buy that much more easily.

I believe he's onto something. The CIA could have been in the grip of a rogue element in the 60s, I wouldn't be suprised if it was them. The elite had much to lose if R.Kennedy was president.
Follow the money? No, follow the motive?
Great piece of journalism by the way, let's hope they see this in the USA.

Those who love to hate the Kennedys will pooh-pooh the CIA involvement theory. They'll say how forthright America and its agencies are and how arrogant it is of the ±«Óătv to run articles suggesting otherwise. To those who saw hope in what the Kennedys could do for America – regardless of conduct in their personal lives – CIA involvement has been suspected all along. America is a republic driven by fierce capitalism and the military-industrial complex has always threatened the county's precarious balance of democratic power. Somewhere behind Kennedy's assassination there is a money trail and I don't find it hard to believe the CIA helped out. Bottom line is the event was a terrible national tragedy despite what the JFK & RFK haters say.

Who cares? We'll never know for sure.

That may seem harsh, but really, are you surprised that governments might kill people they don't like. I'm not.
And if they wanted to get away with it they certainly have the resources.
There are plenty of nutters out there too who'll kill people for ludicrous reasons.
As if any conspirator will ever be found out and tried 40 years or more after the event!

Am I too cynical?

Yes, well done indeed Newsnight. Part of the reason these deaths still fascinate so many is not just the circumstances (though they are intriguing), nor the Camelot personalities or the much-hyped Sixties.Despite the cries that we should let the Kennedys rest in peace and concentrate our attention on more current affairs, the simple truth is that affairs today are shaped significantly by the impact of those bullets.
It is argued convincingly that RFK would have gone on to win the Presidency and would,in all probability, have been a two-term leader. So... no Nixon, no Watergate, no Ford, no Carter, no Reagan ( and Thatcher`s longevity?)
All speculation and not a little chaos theory it must be admitted. But the impact of a bullet... remember Sarajevo and a certain Archduke!

Yeah i think that may be right. I have seen documentaries about John F Kennedy on Discovery. He seemed to be a nice man UNLIKE BUSH THE TERRORIST. When i lived in MidEast, i found a common notion among the people there that actually Kennedy took a Strong Stand against Israel's Nuclear Weapons, how they were transferred to Israel? and thats why he was killed by the Jews.

I dont know whether this is true, but one thing i know and am amazed is that US spends its taxpayers' money on saving and helping Israel and supports Israel, Vetoes every resolution condemning Israel's attacks, on even Lebanon in case of a few mths back where it almost destroyed Lebanon and most important of all gives it yearly TWO BILLION DOLLAR AID UNCONDITIONALLY.

One has to think are they elected to be US leaders or Israels leader?

We spoke to Jefferson Morley while researching our film but he did not want to be interviewed on camera, citing a lack of knowledge of the RFK case.

Morley agreed that Ed Lopez was an extremely credible witness on Joannides and that his positive ID raises the serious possibility that Joannides is the man in the photograph - I see nothing "unfounded" about that. With his ten years of research into Joannides, Morley knows the implications if Joannides was at the hotel that night.

We spoke to Chief Counsel for the House Select Committee on Assassinations, G. Robert Blakey. He said he had limited contact with Joannides and suggested Ed Lopez and Dan Hardway as the two investigators who had the most contact with him. Hardway said "this could be him. Much younger in the picture than in the 70's and it's been a long time".

In 1963, Joannides was the case officer for the DRE, an anti-Castro group of Cuban exiles supported by the CIA. Joannides' primary contact was Dr Luis Fernandez-Rocha. When I showed Fernandez-Rocha the photograph, he said "This is very important (that I quote him directly) I will neither confirm or deny that this is Joannides".

Yes, the authentication of the photo is uncertain until we have further corroboration but look at the photo in context. The man I think is Joannides is pictured with a man positively ID'd as Gordon Campbell, a former JM-WAVE colleague, with a third JM-WAVE colleague, David Morales, positively ID'd nearby. Three lookalikes who happen to know each other, all behaving like law enforcement types? I thought it suspicious enough to warrant public discussion.

In the interest of balance, we asked Morley to suggest an equally credible witness to identify Joannides but so far, despite his acknowledged expertise on the subject, he has not done so.

His recent pronouncements on my film contradict what he has told me privately and I suggest he actually does some reporting of his own on this story to help us uncover the truth of the matter.

Ofcourse, this documentary evidence proves that CIA was involved in ruthless killings of both Kennedies. The brutal and shameful history of CIA covert operations during this century is enough to make us believe that it was their plot and coverup as well. This is the part of their hidden agenda to fantasize anything as a conpiracy theory which could leak out and make American public throw all of them out of their Langley Headquarters. So, they are playing the same game here and media is supporting them in every way possible, as it can, to put in the minds of people that yet this another documentary evidence is nothing more than "Yet One More Conspiracy Theory". But People have come to realise now the secret agenda of CIA and their supportive media and they are trying to dig the truth themselves in every case i.e., from Keneddy assasination to shameful event of 9/11, which is still a mind boggling mystery in the minds of millions of people.

Bear in mind that there were dozens of people surrounding Bobby Kennedy the night he was killed, including his bodyguard, the American football player Rosie Greer. Even though Bobby, like his brother Jack had personal security, he, also like his brother, thrived on direct contact with people, unlike today's important politicians who ride or walk around cities with the way cleared for them.

So, if anyone should be convinced that the account of events which finally put Sirhan Sirhan in prison for life was a false one, it would have been the people who were, quite literally, "close" to Bobby Kennedy that night in LA. Many of these people are still alive; none have ever come forward questioning the conclusion that Sirhan Sirhan was solely responsible for Robert Kennedy's assassination.

And, in the immediate days, months and years after Bobby Kennedy's death in the crowded kitchen of a hotel's ballroom, no one seriously questioned who the killer was. It was in the seventies, with the revelations of the crimes of Watergate, that the conspiracy books (always mentioning a mysterious "woman in a polka dot dress") came out in sizable numbers - usually connecting the killing of the two Kennedys and Martin Luther King with a grand conspiracy -- impossible for the putative conspirators, inept at they were at just about everything they did, to bring off - to direct America down a reactionary, militaristic path. Example: Carl Oglesby's "The Yankees and Cowboys War."

If any observer with an unconventional viewpoint on American political and social life could be expected to give an account of Bobby Kennedy's killing implicating a conspiracy, that person would be the Australian journalist John Pilger, who was in that Los Angeles kitchen that horrible night . But the vivid and brilliantly written eyewitness account Pilger gives of Bobby Kennedy's death in his book "Heros" mentions no conspiratorial angle at all.

It is certainly interesting that CIA agents were near Bobby Kennedy on the night of his death, and this new addition to the account of that night's events should be investigated further.

But the CIA is much too clumsy an organization to pull off an assassination like this one -- in broad daylight, using a putatively "brainwashed" "fall-guy," Sirhan Sirhan, misdirecting the attention of dozens with a patsy who could, unstable man that he was, have behaved erratically even under hypnosis. The expert mentioned in this interesting segment does not give a single example in history of an assassin programmed successfully, without agreeing in advance, to kill -- or to "take the rap" for a killing. Some experts in hypnosis, like the famous American hypnotist Andrew Salter (1914-1996)have also claimed that with the right suggestible subject, a skilled hypnotist could get a person to do just about anything - and to forget about it after the fact. But people do "hysterically" forget or deny crimes they have committed as a way of avoiding guilt, shame, etc.

It was Oliver Stone's film on the Kennedy assassination which has given us a generation of young people who believe in what have been found to be totally implausible grand conspiracy theories about the killing of the Kennedy brothers, or Martin Luther King. Bertrand Russell put forward his own version of Locke's principle of sane rational judgement found in the latter's chapter on "Degrees of Assent" in Locke's "Essay on Human Understanding": "Give to any hypothesis which is worth your while to consider just that degree of credence which the evidence warrants." And there is conclusive evidence that Lee Harvey Oswald and only Lee Harvey Oswald, killed John F. Kennedy, and that Sirhan Sirhan alone killed Robert Kennedy.

Interesting but not conclusive.

If those men were there, what was their motivation? (Being sore about the failure of the Bay of Pigs, alone could not be enough). Concern that RFK might uncover some hidden truth about his brother's past? (Possibly enough to scare them to act if they might be implicated). Further pay-offs for their financial backers? (If indeed the conspiracy lead that far). Men have sold their souls and done worse for less.

Incidently, does anyone else see the similarity between O'Sullivan's conspiracy and the plot of James Ellroy's novel "The Cold Six Thousand"? (Surely worth producing - along with its prequal "American Tabloid")??

I'd like to add some balance to my earlier comments on Shane 'Sullivan's piece on the assasssination of Bobby Kennedy.

I criticized the story for being thinly sourced. But, it must be said, that thinly sourced stories can be true if the source is good.

Ed Lopez is a credible witness and his near certainty that Joannides appears in a photo apparently taken in Los Angeles on the night of June 6, 1968 has to be taken seriously.

If Joannides was there, the implications are profound.

So O'Sullivan's piece, while open to criticism, underscores an important issue of JFK accountability for the new U.S. Congress:

The CIA must be compelled to abandon its JFK stonewalling and disclose fully about George Joannides's actions and whereabouts in 1963 and 1968.

Assassinations of politicians has always been a source of morbid fascination for many. To this day some historians are coming up with new theories about Abraham Lincoln's murder.

In the case of Robert Kennedy, he was a politican who touched many people of that generation. Yes, he had many enemies, from the Mafia to Cuban exiles to Fidel Castro, any and all could have had a hand in Kennedy's death.

The fact that one twisted individual could have committed this act is something many cannot accept. Strangely though they can accept a twisted indivudal could attempt to take the life of another President, Ronald Reagan.

I'm sorry to have missed this presentation and hope it is repeated soon.

Having always subscribed to the conspriracy theory of JFK, this latest accusation doesn't surprise me in the least and I can't believe that any right-minded person would think otherwise.

Political intrigue aside, you have the JFK, RFK, MLK and even the MM deaths that don't 'sit right' and then your straight forward 'unhinged' assasination, eg John Lennon. Why is it so difficult for some to see the bigger picture?

The real issue is that we can readily see and deal with the up-front megalomanics of this world. The faceless world shapers are the more frightening ones. KK

Another magic bullet? C'mon?! RFK was shot from the front but the bullet that killed him clearly came from behind. This is the work of the Republicans, who murdered JFK, RFK, MLK and Malcolm X. They also had a hand in toppling governments all over Latin America.

Of course it's true.

Look if George Bush Sr. was head of the CIA, not at the time but at any time. This makes it a no brainer. The CIA needs to be dismantled and rebuilt with OVERSIGHT, OVERSIGHT, OVERSIGHT!! There should be at least 3 heads of the CIA a REB a DEM and IND. This is the only way it can be trusted.

They can not be trusted in it's current form. They turn on their own (Valerie Plame). They take the law into their own hands (both Kennedy assanations)as they have many, many times already.

This is a question for the misinformed and brainwashed Fox viewers.

I agree with this report and it needs investigated

The fact that they're saying that Sirhan Sirhan couldn't remember the shooting "even under hypnosis" undermines the credibility of this report from the get-go. Hypnosis is not a reliable method for recalling so-called "repressed memories," which is why hypnosis-induced testimony is no longer allowed in US courts of law.

I can't speak for the rest of the report, but nothing says "tinfoil hat conspiracy theory" like junk science five paragraphs into an article.

Further reading, for those who are interested:

Thank you all for contributing to the debate about the film. I would like to clarify my position regarding various points mentioned above.

We only had 12 minutes, so we decided to focus on the new evidence of a CIA presence at the hotel, itself complex enough to get across in the time.

We sketched in some of the existing controversies because they are relevant and still unresolved and we shot a number of interviews we couldn't include in the final edit.

We interviewed Frank Burns, for instance. He was standing one foot behind and to the right of Kennedy. He re-enacted the shooting for us in his living room and placed Sirhan three feet away. I would ask Mr Ayton to provide a witness closer to Kennedy who can place Sirhan's gun one inch behind.

Mr. Ayton regularly trots out Boris Yaro, who was much further away, looking through a camera lens and admitted Kennedy was in silhouette. Yaro also describes Sirhan standing over Kennedy when he slumped to the floor, firing down, which makes no sense at all given the upward trajectory described in the autopsy.

A dozen witnesses place Sirhan's gun several feet away and in front of Kennedy, not one inch behind.
Sirhan's firing trajectory fits the wound patterns of the four other victims and other bullet-holes found in the pantry door-frames.

We did not have time in the film to go back into the ballistics of the case, but the autopsy results and witness testimony provide alarming contradictions, the coroner Dr Noguchi is unconvinced Sirhan acted alone and the fatal bullet has never been matched to Sirhan's gun.

I can suggest a number of possible motivations for these agents. Kennedy had promised to pull out of Vietnam, ending the War, military spending, CIA operations in the region involving Morales at the time and yielding S.E. Asia to the Communists. If elected President, Bobby Kennedy would either micro-manage the CIA as he had done in the secret war on Cuba in 1962-3 or "smash it into a thousand pieces" as his brother had once threatened. He could also use the Presidency to reopen the investigation into his brother's death - going by Morales' comment, these same men may have been involved.

Friends of Kennedy have questioned the conclusion that Sirhan acted alone. Paul Schrade has led the campaign to reopen the investigation for over thirty years and Bob Kennedy's press secretary Frank Mankiewicz supported a campaign to reopen the case in 1992. Most aren't publicly vocal about it because, as many of them told us, their lives stopped that night and it's simply too painful to revisit the subject.

Finally, if these are, indeed, CIA agents, what is their connection to Sirhan? Sirhan had no criminal history and no propensity for violence - hardly the ideal hired assassin. If we are to connect the two, from the available evidence, I believe the hypnotic programming of Sirhan to act as a decoy for the real assassin is the most likely explanation. Richard Helms, Director of CIA in 1968, initiated CIA experiments aimed at creating such a "Manchurian Candidate" in 1953.

We interviewed Dr Herbert Spiegel, a world authority on hypnosis at Columbia University. He has studied the case and believes that Sirhan, a highly hypnotisable subject, was programmed to fire at Kennedy using what he calls a "compulsive triad" - a compulsion to comply with the program, an amnesia regarding the programming itself and post-rationalisation - I don't remember shooting Kennedy but I was the only gunman witnesses saw and I was angry at Kennedy for promising to sell the bombers to Israel, so I must have killed him "with twenty years of malice aforethought", as Sirhan said in the trial.

All very complex stuff which we couldn't fit in here but the interviews we couldn't include in this film will form part of a longer feature-length documentary on the case which will be available early next year. You can monitor its progress at www.rfkmustdie.com

Thanks again for your opinions. New leads have already emerged from the piece the other night and we will continue to pursue the story.

Once again - this new evidence brings ROARING BACK to the suface all the deep distrust, UTTER and ABSOLUTE OVERWHELMING DISGUST, I have for the "American government". For God's sake get your head out of your ass America! OF COURSE the CIA was involved!!!! - JUST as it was involved with the assination - COLD BLOODED MURDER -- of his brother Robert and JUST as it was involved in the death Martin Luther King as well. HELLLOOOO? anybody home?! PEOPLE!!! -- WAKE. THE. HELL. UP. Our government IS NOT and NEVER HAS BEEN what they appear and pass themselves off to be. "Government" is nothing more than a diabolical machine run by a few elite good old boys who plot and kill to keep their control, their power and their (OUR) money. DEMAND ANSWERS! DEMAND - HEAR ME PEOPLE DEMAND THAT THE FILES ON JFK and MLK ARE RELEASED - UNALTERED, UNCENSORED and there you will find your answers. Yeah - RIGHT. Sure. Like "that" will ever happen!!!!

The kill shot still was not Sirhan's, no matter what other points O'Sullivan makes are explained away.
I've always thought that some wealthy people in the United States and around the world used U.S. government resources to assassinate the Kennedys and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. because they stood in the way of the Vietnam war. It was a coup d'etat.

It is amazing how many of the posts apparently think it was ok for the govt to kill JFK and RFK because of their past sins. Not to sound like an old guy, but I lived through it and worked for Bobby as a 14 year old. I still miss him!

Both sides of conspiracy or not have valid arguments in RFKs death. I've read through enough to say that some of the arguments on both sides are pretty loopy too.

The crux of it is, that the CIA is perfectly capable, able, and willing to do things like this. That is a fact that has been documented and proven.

As long as they are allowed and continue to behave the way they do and have historically, I am not going to trust them. So any evidence the provide, or those working with them provides, lacks credibility.

Really reading what I could find of the RFK case, the conspirators have the more reasonable argument. There is alot of info and you kind of have to sift it since there are a quite a few theories that really reach on both sides.

As far as the person that wondered about hypnosis and why not just have Sirhan shoot the bullets. You have to know how hypnosis works in that situation before you can understand that. There is a reason, read up on hypnosis, especially involving situations like doing something bad like killing etc.

One thing has become eminently clear over the last several years is that people in the US government cannot keep secrets. If there was a government conspiracy to kill Bobby Kennedy it would have been leaked several years ago. The same is true of JFK. Somebody always talks. If, on the other hand, it was a Mafia conspiracy, I can see that secret being kept to the grave.

All Shane O'Sullivan is asking is why these CIA operatives were apparently at the Ambassador hotel that evening... it's a perfectly legitimate question, and no amount of scoffing at conspiracy theories negates the value of his contribution. Nor is he claiming that any of these operatives were a supposed 'second shooter'. The fact that Joannides was the CIA liaison for the 1978 Congressional investigation is also intriguing and calls for a clear explanation - which I dare say will never be forthcoming.

Yeah,right. The CIA plotted the murder of Kennedy,then sent a few CIA guys to watch( and be filmed)to make sure it happened? Hey, there were some football players there too.Maybe it was a plot by the National Football League. And the Ford Theater was full of actors when Lincoln was shot. Maybe it was an Actor's Equity conspiracy! And,of course,the Mafia leaders had JFK shot,then let this maniac Oswald on his own to roam the streets of Dallas and get caught just as they always do after a Mafia gun down!And, of course,FDR invited the Japanese to bomb Pearl Harbor ad nauseum....

This does not come as a real surprise. This sort of action by the government agencies is not unknown and can be expected when the U.S. keeps always interfering in other countries - Cuba is evidently in this with the CIA given carte blanche by certain of the governmental people. What a shame. What on earth is the country doing? Where has the country gone?

I'm the author of a political biography of Bobby Kennedy, which also includes a chapter on his assassination ("Robert Kennedy: The Final Years," St Martin's Press, New York). I've just seen the Newsnight story and yes, it opens new questions.

It doesn't prove anything (and am not sure O'Sullivan is claiming it does) but there are several things about the assassination which simply don't add up, not least of which is the position of the gun which killed Kennedy (very close and behind him) compared with the position of Sirhan (in front and several feet or yards away).

Newsnight should be congratulated for broadcasting the piece, and O'Sullivan should too.

Odd this come out around the same time as a movie which is set at the time of murder?

Mel Ayton said that he could provide clips from the LAPD footage. Really? How did you get those clips Mr. Ayton? I've been trying for two months to get the local television stations (LA) to let me have access to their unedited footage of that night to no avail. But you have no trouble getting LAPD footage. How interesting. Could it be the publisher of your book is not "Potomac Books" but in reality,"Langley Books."

From the MKULTRA documents Richard Helms, Deputy Director of Plans argued for the continuation of the project. Here are three aspects that Helms was excited about. (1) Materials which will render the induction of HYPNOSIS easier or otherwise enhance its usefulness. (2) Materials and physical methods which will produce AMNESIA for events PRECEEDING and DURING their use. (3) Substances which alter personality structures in such a way that the tendency of the recipient to become dependant upon another person is enhanced. - Gee, sound like anyone we know.

Has anyone checked the conspiracy theory of Teddy Kennedy's escape from the car that left MaryJo Copechnie to drown or the conspiracy of the Kennedy involvement in Marilyn Monroe's "suicide"? Most of us are tired of so-called conspiracy theories, including the World Trade Center tragedy. Please let the world move on. I compare them to an old Benny Hill show when a commentater asked Hill, a would be film director why he changed from coloured film to black and white film, was it a new form of filming, Benny Hill replied that they ran out of the coloured film!!! Enough.

This article intrigues me. I would like to see more of this sort of thing.

RFK is a hero of mine.

Mind control is is very much a part of the Black Ops and has been hugely perfected.Snipers J.Mahammad & L.Malvo sent several letters to the authorities saying they would keep killing until the words "The Duck is in the noose like the sniper is in our trap" was broadcast over the media airwaves.Finally all kinds of high ranking officials in the goverment went on T.V. and repeated the phrase constantly all day.Only a few hours later the shooters were found in a rest area,parked under a streetlamp,rifle laying on the backseat and one of their wallets on the hood and were taken into custody without incident.I have often wondered how nobody ever picked up on this as it seemed to me the perfect case to expose MK-ULTRA and the case of a operative out of control and was only exposed because he got to close to D.C.Or just maybe that was the plan.I realize this was off th RFK subject but thought this might provoke some thought among those that think all thought of conspiracy is some form of madness.
g.w.bush,9-12-01 "Pay no attention to the conspiracy theorists of which there will be many".With vision like that you would think he would have seen Iraq coming.Keep up the good work,we are listening.Peace

Watch cherachs 1972 golden globe winning documentary RFK on google video . Its a great documentary .

The question is not who killed Robert, but who sent the killers there? I was there that night...I saw him being put in the ambulance...I cried for our country.

Strange inconsistencies in factual accounts, as well as peculiar scenarios surrounding three particular deaths -- Robert Kennedy, John Kennedy and Marilyn Monroe -- resound much too loudly.

Why is it that the news media is always looking for an even more stimulating story ? Bobby Kennedy is dead; please let him rest in piece. Sometimes the truth really is simply the truth.

As an American who remembers both assassinations AND, from my roof deck, watched the Pentagon burn for three days in 2001, I'm certain that the US government and the reactionaries who control it are capable of absolutely anything.

The USA was founded on the principles of liberty, justice, slavery, and genocide. We need psychopathic mass murderers in postions of power. Not that we're alone in these matters.

Disagree? Look it up. It's a matter of public record.

Nobody in the US reads anymore... ignorance IS bliss.

The clip is interesting. More believable than LA police. I'm hard pressed to believe anything from the government today. So why should I believe the lies I've read in the past?
Amazing that Bobby was shot in the back of the head by a man in front of him and that Jack was shot in the front of the head from a man behind him.

It is a matter of the highest national interest for their to be an immediate investigation of the question as to why CIA operatives were at the site of the RFK assassination. The new majority in the Congress must pursue this matter promptly and vigorously.

RFK (my hero since childhood) was killed by a lone nut who thus caused the deaths of two of my cousins in Vietnam, in a war which would never have continued had RFK been elected.

Sirhan Sirhan is responsible for the deaths of over 20,000 young men who never had the chance at life because he stole it from them by his evil actions.

What an absolute tragedy that the last great American radical with compassion and heart died because some nutjob believed RFK supported Israel.

Requiescat in pace, Robert.

one program should send shivers down any spine: MK Ultra. a secret [at the time] program dedicated to brainwashing and the darker side of hypnosis and psychological warfare.

Excerpt from wikipedia>
also known as MK-ULTRA) was the code name for a CIA mind-control research program that began in the 1950s.[1][2] There is much published evidence that the project involved not only the use of drugs to manipulate persons, but also the use of electronic signals to alter brain functioning.[3]

It was first brought to wide public attention by the U.S. Congress (in the form of the Church Committee) and a presidential commission (known as the Rockefeller Commission) (see Revelation below) and also to the U.S. Senate.

under Dulles, Dr, Gottlieb and the boys did things that could make your soul shreik in horror.

they were looking to take thins manchurian canidade crap to the next level. Of the documents not destroyed by Gottlieb. the last project mentioned wa acquiring a Middle Eastern person to hard wire as an assassin or patsy.

dont believe me google it.

the CIA has had its hands in coke and
guns and tainted black gold Im sure that reguardless of where these agents were " legitimately" stationed it is likely they played a peripheral role. its the lady in the polka dotted dress Im interested in, these men and sirhan have been unearthed. Why hasnt this woman been found? usually at her age she may want to coem forward for a book deal. But it seems she ahs dissapeared in the sands of time, a shame really.

but those men and the CIA's activities in the fifities and sixties were some of the darkest. I wouldnt doubt for a moment if they were side contract to the MKultra program. with Sirhan and a gun with blanks, and they packing the heat.

You see the prgram found a way to hynotize a person and have a "controller" be the only person to acces the part of the mind they "split" and squirrelled away. no matter how an enemy try to crack it they cant. this may have happened to Sirhan, which explains the lack of recall.

It got sosophisitcated to the point where they could reate an entire personality with in a person that is contaray to their normal character.

It may not be known to Shane O'Sullivan or even to many posting here that some new photographs of the night RFK was killed have emerged in recent months, though they are not widely available. They are the photographs of Harry Benson, whose exhibition has been running in Edinburgh recently. It will be interesting to see, when they become more widely available, whether they can in any way contribute to either the placing of a gunman or the identification of any background figures.

Food for thought.

During the Kennedy administration, Atty Genl Robert Kennedy had mafia boss Carlos Marcello arrested and deported under the criminal's phony passport (Costa Rica I think it was). That one event led to both Kennedy assassinations, and nothing else.

A&E/History Channel, at the time they were calling themselves the "Network for the New Millennia,"
ran a one-hour documentary featuring the Panel members of the JFK assassinations Record Act of 1992.

The Panel was headed by John Tunnheim.

Their conclusion was that:

"OSWALD WAS EMPLOYED BY THE CIA AND WORKED ON HIGH LEVEL ASSIGNMENTS AND PROBABLY ALSO FOR THE FBI."

Wouldn't we all like to see this documentary again -- !!!

The documentary ran reliably for a few months and then a counter-documentary appeared for three or four viewings that I noted. It was obviously very hastily put together and laughable.

Evidently John Tunnheim gave confidential testimony to the Senate upon completion of their work. I can't find any record of this in the open records.

However, the film did exist and presume many viewers saw it.

And -- Tunnheim clearly states . . . with the text written at the botttom of the screeen -- at least twice -- that . . .

"OSWALD WAS EMPLOYED BY THE CIA AND WORKED ON HIGH LEVEL ASSIGNMENTS AND PROBABLY ALSO FOR THE FBI."

Journalists at the time of the JFK assassination repeatedly asked for Oswald's employment records and tax records and they were denied.

The conspiracy in this nation -- the conspiracy of capitalism, itself -- is based on control of the wealth and resources of America. The ruling class have that control and do not plan on losing it.

Ergo: Global Warming is now a more serious threat to the planet and humanity that any other threat and it is compounding rapidly. The effects we are feeling now are based on our activities of 50 years ago -- i.e., 1956 -- the beginning of the huge increase in cars as the population increased and the move to the suburbs began.

Only fools never doubt.
And this is certainly not conspiracy-free-America.

Didn't see the article on TV but have been aware of the CIA involvement for many years. Interesting that there was no mention of MK ULTRA in regard to Sirhan Sirhan. Well done ±«Óătv, well done Shane, well done Jeremy Paxman. How about going one stage further and interviewing Alex Jones about 9/11 and the complicity of government officials?

The comment was made that the CIA
men being there could be "explained".
I am afraid the explanation, if it were ever uncovered, might put the CIA, certain members of organized crime, and other persons, some still living, in a VERY bad light.

I don't recall any "explanation" of this type being presented about any case such as this in my lifetime or before. If someone can dig one up within the last 200 years, please
post it here.

Great thread! You're right Wim, it's funny to see the disinfo machine in action. I'm calling post 7 and 25, trying to spin CIA towards FBI.

it was the hollow-earthers.

i mean, you have to ask: "who benefits?

LOLOLOLROTFLLLLL!!!111!!!!

Yes, I have always believed the CIA killed the Kennedy's and MLK and etc (including JFK JR)...

While the truth is the same it's nice to see new evidence. As time goes on it matters less on who fired the shots. What really matters is WHO CALLED SHOTS. Those powers are still in control of our two countries.

Yamamoto once said at the time of Pearl Harbor "I'm afraid we have awakened a sleeping giant", well the "sleeping giant" is once again beginning to awake. WAKE UP AMERICA.

Where will all of this go? I believe they had something to do with it, also how could Sirhan have shot him in the back of the head? Impossible, yet we have known that for years and nothing has ever been done about it... My whole point! I am very discouraged by the lack of a complete investigation into the REAL facts such as this. WHY were these men there if they were not on RFK detail?

I'm not a fan of conspiracy theories, but then again, neither am I a big believer in coincidences.

There are too many coincidences in this report to ignore. The older we get, the more we see and hear of things unimaginable, but nevertheless true.

It doesn't surprise me a bit that this evidence has now come to light, or that it could have been suppressed for all these decades.

As an American looking back upon our political history, I can very much see how our country took a turn down the wrong path, and how very different our path might have been if either Kennedy had lived.

Now, look at who/what stood to benefit from their deaths.

Conspiracy theory no longer seems quite so implausible....

I hope this isn't the end of this investigation. It's just so sad that it comes from our "mother" country - perhaps evidence that "we" Americans have not yet quite grown up.

Did I miss the fact that LBJ Democratic President was THE MAN during all the "Coincidences"

The current U.S. President is to blame for all of the CIA's activities over the past six years...right? Stands to reason that LBJ approved the assassinations of MLK and RFK. The 1960's were clearly the darkest period in US history and we can put our finger on one MAN fro the reason.

It's a shame good men die this way and their deaths go unexplained.

It's also a shame the majority of Americans are still unable to believe that their government is capable of actions like these. Until they do, this invisible hand of sorts, will decide the fate of the country. The events of the past century are too suspect not to admit a deeper agenda at hand and it does not have the peoples interests at heart.

Keith Douglas wrote, "Am I anti-American ? Certainly not.
The people of the USA are mainly good people as are all of mankind. Their government however is particularly nasty and dangerous.
When the US people finally throw off their system of society - and they will - they will be doing themselves and mankind a very great service!"

Thank you, Keith. I am always relieved to hear that some people realize that 49% of us do not support the current administration.

I would not put anything past the U.S. government... not during the Kennedy years, and certainly not now.

Regards,
NT from NY

It goes on and on.... Recall, please, the targets of the anthrax letters, and the source of the "weaponized anthrax".

These many deaths (and attempts) of political personalities who were wildly popular among the citizenry, should be continually scrutinized and reviewed by Historians, as well as scientists and hopefully, law enforcement people.

I understand Mike Rupert, of FROM THE WILDERNESS was fearful for his after publishing Crossing the Rubicon. I further understand that he's quite mysteriously ill, and no longer in the USA.

Keep informed, and follow your hunches. Disregard nothing, and above all use your common sense.

Dave

It seems pretty obvious that CIA involvement in all Kennedy assassinations is very highly likely. The lone nut assassin was the terrorist of the sixties. The lone-nut assassin and the muslim terroristof today are scapegoats fabricated inside the CIA's stink factory. These US Intelligence Apparatus fabricated monsters are always easy to recognise in the sense that they always defy what your brains normally concieves as plausible. The Watergate burglars were the same CIA men who fired shots on the grassy knoll in 1963. Reporters in DC all know that, regardless of the conspiracy of silence surrounding all illegal activities of the CIA. CIA is a club used by the ultra rich to conduct their dirty business illegaly, all conveniently under the cover of secrecy granted by the CIA's "National Security" mandate. Everybody knows that although few will come forward and admit it to you.

Conspiracy theorists have far too much faith in the abilities of the powerful.

They can fake moon landings, murder presidents/presdential candidates and mastermind terrorist atrocities to blame islamic extremists.

But how come they can't even manage to bury a few weapons in the sands of Iraq to cover up their lies?

The possible involvement of CIA personnel in Robert Kennedy's assassination is not new. Bill Kurtis did an "Investigative Reports" presentation on the A&E network about 14 years ago where he brings up the presence of CIA "investigators" who happened to be right on the scene as it occurred and one of them intimidating a witness about who she saw and what she heard. They were there to control the evidence of course. In all that time, nothing has been done to re-open the investigation by an independent body (surely not the FBI, CIA or any U.S. government agency). The two Kennedy assassinations were carried out on the orders of high level people within the CIA bureaucracy using low level agents and "patsies" to minimize their involvement. These people and their backers have too much power to ever worry about being brought to justice. They will die of old age before anyone in the U.S. wakes up to the fact that their government is in the hands of an elite right-wing cabal and always will be.

Took me twelve hours to read all this.

You are all right. The Yanks did it.

They will continue.

Something is not right with these interviews.

Since when do CIA agents give interviews to discuss the identify of other agents?

They are a little too compliant, too helpful.

Why is the media who stonewalled all such information for 40 years suddenly willing to "discover" that there is evidence of CIA involvement?

If you want more information like additional interview with O'Sullivan
and other experts on the case visit the BlackOp Radio archive.

- Lynn Mangan, Sirhan's official researcher she basically is the major expert on the evidence destruction and coverup (link to her archive on the web)

- O'Sullivan - the ±«Óătv guy mentioned in this thread who now found Morales and other CIA guys (Joannides who later compromised HSCA) in the Ambassador Hotel TV footage and photos

- Jamie Scott Enyart, the famous Ambassador Hotel pantry photographer

- late Prof. Phil Melanson - the major official scholar working on the case

- late Lawrence Teeter - Sirhan's last lawyer

All here:

I think you are being overly paranoid Mel. Next thing you'll be claiming that the ±«Óătv is conspiring against you! The truth will come out in the end.

If rougues in the CIA did take out the Kennedy's - our elected managers in this thing we call a republic, then they did an end around on accountability and democratic principles. Those here who dismiss the seriousness of this old issue with far reaching tentacles, need to reconsider their ideas on what it means to be a law abiding person of due process and democratic participation. Otherwise, we should just go back to benevolent fiefdoms and forget about the middle class, such as it is.

When the will of the greater majority is abbrogated by the elite minority, then we have tyranny. It's a simple concept surely understood by even the most hard headed among us. Iraq is a living example of what happens when the priviledged few make boneheaded selfish decisions for the rest of us without our approval.

If there was a conspiracy it was probably the angry hotel and motel owners RFK stiffed. It is common knowledge that he walked out without paying his bill in over 1500 establishments. When asked the comment he made was "they (the hotel owners) should be proud that I stayed there."

He also double crossed the Organized crime family that saw to his brother's election. Perhaps not quite the icon he has been protrayed, is he?

Mr. O'Sullivan is on the trail of truth.

First - The physical evidence, the gun shot woulnd to the head, proves the "official" story isn't reliable.

Second - If it's not reliable, and obviously so, then who would be in a position to cover it up and why?

Answer:

To understand this you have to understand JFK's assassination and that of his son, JFK Jr., and yes, he was murdered.

I encourage anyone interested in this to watch the following on Google Video or Youtube:

JFK 2: The Bush Connection
Who Murdered JFK Jr.

The father was murdered because he was on to the secret governments ways, the second was murdered for fear that he would deal with his brother's murderers, once in power, and the son - the son was murdered because he didn't accept the Warren Commission. And in an America where star power can get you elected..JFK Jr. was a real star...the murderers realized that he had to be dealt with.

This has been an ongoing thing for quite sometime and has a great deal to do with one world government.

If you don't believe that, then you are bling.

America is an evil and corrupt empire; run by closeted homosexuals, pedophiles and satanists.

I know that all sounds out there, but the evidence is also out there, and unfortunately...the evidence is overwhelming and damning.

Watch a movie on GV or YT called:

Conspiracy of Silence or Google Kay Griggs and read or watch her interviews.

We are being lied to on a massive scale and it's time we all realize that fact. And for the most part our media lies to us or hides it, either way they are not to be trusted.

If you want the real truth go to www. prisonplanet.com - you will find it there.

Hats of to Newsnight for having this on, though.

Oh, and yes, 911 was done by the US government - 19 illtrained Muslims, none of who could fly, put the a multi-trillion dollar defense system to sleep for over 2 hours...lol.

And yes, the London Bombings also. It's all a fraud; every last bit of it.

Watch:

Loose Change /911 Demolition Mysteries / 911 Press for Truth / Terror Storm

You will see that what I am telling you is the truth.

All these films are available on Google.

Proverbs 18:13

"To speak truth in a time of universal deceit, is a revolutionary act."

George Orwell

I feel grateful for people like Brian (and George Orwell) who are not satisfied to simply accept the "news" we are continually fed. Many of us have unknowingly discarded our freedom to think freely. If you want to "wake up" to what's REALLY going on, please explore the recommendations of Brian and those who have posted before us. I would like to add "9/11 and American Empire" is a fantastic book, as well. Ladies and gentlemen, free thinking people of the world...Truth is our ally. Much love.

Provocative article and commentary: very good. Just because one believes conspiracies might exist doesn't automatically qualify one as unbalanced, paranoid, or on the lunatic fringe. Conspiracies DO exist! "They" don't want us to know about them, want to discredit those who theorize about them. Of course!

A little internet research found the following interesting information about George Joannides. This information builds further on Shane's revelations.

"The Chief Counsel of the Committee [The United States House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations] later changed his views that the CIA was being cooperative and forthcoming with the investigation when he learned that the CIA's special liaison to the Committee researchers, George Joannides, was actually involved with some of the organizations that Lee Harvey Oswald was involved with in the months leading up to the assassination, including an anti-Castro group, the DRE, which was linked to the CIA, where the liaison, Joannides, worked in 1963. Chief Counsel Blakey later stated that Joannides, instead, should have been interviewed by the Committee, rather than serving as a gatekeeper to the CIA's evidence and files regarding the assassination. He further disregarded and suspected all the CIA's statements and representations to the Committee, accusing it of obstruction of justice."
Source:

I think there is a good reason his post got deleted. On his own site there seems to be an explanation:

In the comments we read:

"The agents, O’Sullivan claimed, had been responsible for the assassination. Newsnight editors believe O’Sullivan is correct in his assumptions. A related article on their website states, “[O’Sullivan’s investigation] reveals that the operatives and four unidentified associates were at the Ambassador Hotel, Los Angeles in the moments before and after the shooting on 5 June, 1968.”

Where is your evidence that "Newsnight editors believe O’Sullivan is correct in his assumptions" that rogue CIA agents were responsible for RFK's assassination? The ±«Óătv editors made no such declaration, as well you know.

end of comment

A false accusation like this one against the host of this site could be a big enough reason to delete someone's post. It's strange that his post stayed up for 4 days.

Has anyone seen a special interest film titled confessions of an assassin?....I watched it approx.....10 years ago and can not find it now......it was an inmate being interviewed about the jfk murder and he seemed to have details.....thanks....tom

Sirhan Sirhan had an attorney, Lawrence Teeter, who worked for many years on his case until dying of cancer just a year or so ago, who had the same theory that is expressed in this article, but with additional allegations with regard to how the trial proceedings were manipulated to convict him. I wonder if the author of this article interviewed Teeter.

Let me get this straight. Sirhan shot Kennedy in the back of the head with the barrel 3 inches away while standing 3 feet in front of him? Sirhan Fired 10 bullets from an 8 shot gun? He cannot remember the shooting even under hypnosis by experts? There is now video evidence of cia agents and the director of psychological warfare present?

Pay attention.

Sirhan was on hypno dugs which were used alot by the CIA. The dirty LAPD were involved an are still heavy drug traffickers. There was a 9 min radio blackout to prevent any officers from radioing a description of suspects fleeing. Thane Eugene Cesar killed RFK. Others were there to fire random shots to throw people off. It was actually a sloppy job. There are those, like Mike Ruppert, who were interned there and has had an inside look at what happened. All witnesses stories contradict the official RP. There's always a Bush around during an assasination, and LA and DALLAS have the 2 dirtiest police departments in the country.

That's right Winston. In the future
"There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always — do not forget this, Winston — always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face …for ever."

"The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which."

That's because 1984 is just a number, you can't predict when this future will become fact. I think the people you refer to as the conspiracists feel that a lot of restrictive laws and amendments are being put in place not to make us safer but to increase control over our lives. George Orwell warned us for global dystopia and predicted the tools of this machine.

This whole saga is indicative of the "rogue state' mentality that seems to have had a pervasive, yet insiduous influence within this supposed 'bastion of freedom'. I believe that this report warrants deeper investigation and a closer analytical scrutiny of all the facts that emerge from the slimy ooze that has been uncovered. This may well be the soul cleansing catharsis that America needs to exorcise its demons.

A further complication of the 'conspiracy theories' is what was revealed during the US Congress hearings on the JFK assassination in the mid-1970s. Within days of the assassination the CIA advised its editorial assets in Europe, ie, editors of Europian newsmedia it had on retainer, to print articles dismissing any notion of a conspiracy involved in the killing. The way to do this was to link any questioning of a particular conspiracy to this particular event with general conspiracy theories of history. In the 1960 assassinations in the US this worked very well, the King and Kennedy killings.
Yet in the killing of a political figure it is extremely reasonable to asked who benefits from the death and whether it was a murder committed for political gain.
The recent killings in Lebanon, Russia and London have all raised this question, legitimatly enough, I think.
However that someone benefits does not mean they did it. You still need evidence.
Kevin

It has now been over a week since Shane O'Sullivan's promo appeared on the ±«Óătv. Yet not one word of it in the U.S. media. Not one word out of ABC,NBC,CBS, CNN or any local television stations. Not one word from the Los Angeles Times or the New York Times or any mainstream publications. No debate. No info. These guys are good. To block all information in themainstrem media in a country as big as the U.S. These guys are good. Need any more proof that Mr.O'Sullivan has the goods? Michael Calder

David Lifton solved the jfk case in his book. {best evidence} we will never get the truth from our government because they controlled and still control all the evidence in the case. Lifton will go down in history as the man who solved the jfk murder. As for bobby, the fatal shot was fired from no more than 1 and 1/2 inches from his head and not 1 witness to the murder has ever said sirhan got that close. in the jfk case we have the magic bullet that was fired from behind but entered from the front, and in bobby's case we have the 3 magic bullets fired from in front but entering from behind.

Thanks to the ±«Óătv for the video and discussion.
We've had a long string of violence in America killing progressives.
I agree, the evidence is still being controlled and would add that the media is not freely able to investigate and report; on much of anything these days.

The definitive analysis of the JFK assassination is in The Onion

"Kennedy Slain By CIA, Mafia, Castro, LBJ, Teamsters, Freemasons...."

Hi

I was reading recently Deep Politics III by Peter Dale Scott where the following is information is given,

"From other sources, we learn more about the autonomy of these kryptocracies, especially the CIA. It was almost by accident that the public learned of a secret agreement, in violation of a Congressional statute, whereby the CIA was exempted from reporting crimes of which it was aware to the Justice Department. This agreement was so secret that for almost two decades successive Attorneys General were unaware of it.[17] (My understanding is that the agreement arose from a "flap" in Thailand, where a CIA officer who was about to report on the local drug traffic was murdered by another, who was working with it.)[18]"

If this is true can one realistically expect that the CIA is going to come forward and tell what it know ? :-)

Cheers

Special Attention by Shane
O'Sullivan, "±«Óătv Overnight"

CNN's Brad Johnson has been
in touch with me of recent,
seeking my input on their
RFK Assassination Project. Vanity aside, I'm generally
regarded to be "the leading
authority" on the RFK case.
I've not yet viewed your tv
program, but have the story
in written form.

For now, based on my book's
content (just re-published
by Carroll & Graf 11-06), a
CIA-FBI "presence" was pre- eminent before, during and
after RFK's murder via long
time clandestine alignments
within LAPD, which is STILL
the case, if not MUCH worse
since 9/11 & "Patriot Act"
excesses. Hopefully, we can
arrive at a mutually-useful
line of solid communication
(confidentially of course). Please advise, accordingly.

Sincerely,

Jonn G. Christian, Author, The Assassination of Robert
Kennedy/The Conspiracy, The
Cover-Up/Foreword by Oliver
Stone.

(libven05@yahoo.com)

well, i read from a biography of Ms. Marilyn Monroe that he and the latter has a secret relationship and one thing more they are connected to Mafia. Isn't it?

well, Onasis might have killed him as well, he had an affair with his wife Jacqueline Kennedy

Those who believe friends of the three CIA men who say it wasn't them at the Ambassador Hotel should re-enter reality. Of course friends would not implicate each other in something like an assassination. How about some independent verification? Regardless of the outcome, there will always be defenders of the CIA who will tell you they are clean, truthful, law-abiding and peaceful. The truth is whatever they can get you to believe.

I tried to use the link on the ±«Óătv website to show the video to my son last night, and it did not work. The windows media choice showed a 3 second video an then stopped. The realplayer choice sent me to a page not found error. Could someone get this fixed or tell me a different way/place to see it?

Sometime in the late 80s or early 90s (I forget exactly when), WGBH in Boston showed a documentary, I think as part of their Frontline series, produced independently about the JFK assassination. The independent producer was a former aide to JFK; I believe he was said to be a friend of the family. The program concerned a man who claimed to be a longtime lawyer for the mafia who came forward to tell a tale about how certain mafia bosses told him information that revealed that they had been involved in killing JFK in order to stop Bobby. The lawyer was interviewed and the producer of the documentary said that many of the claims he made that could be checked up on held up on investigation. Even though it was just hearsay evidence, I thought at the time that surely something more would come of this documentary, especially being shown on a major TV station (and, I believed, nationally). Yet I never heard of it again.

Does anyone know anything about this documentary? Does it still exist? Did the person who produced it continue to investigate? Did anyone else actually see it? I'd appreciate any information.

I hope Shane is able to finally break through the fog concerning these cases and make something happen to re-open them.

LETS JUST LIVE IT IN THE PAST AND PRAY FOR HIS SOUL.

This confirms in part the efforts of US activist Allard Lowenstein, a famous lawyer and activist who was shot on Valentines Day in the late 1970's. He was trying to get the RFK case reopened but having problems with the LAPD, which was refusing to reopen ballistics testing. He made the point that the body guard, standing behind RFK with a gun at the time of the assassination, had been hired that morning and not seen since. (also, there was the matter of too many bullets around for Sirhan's gun.)
The CIA's psychological warfare agent ties in with observations about Sirhan Sirhan....

RFK's statements about Palestinians were outrageous at the time; it sppeared as if poor Sirhan would have had a motive because of RFK's insults.

It's good to see this coverage after all of these years of silence.

Personally, although I always start out believing (most of) the official version of these shocking events, I have come to think that the opposite of "conspiracy theorist" is "naive".

Americans have spent 40 years trying very hard not to know the truth about the Kennedy assissanations.

THEY DO NOT WANT TO KNOW THE TRUTH.

If someone proves it to them, first they will be very angry that someone is making them admit what they knew all along, and secondly, they would have to actually confront their worst fear which is that there government is far and above the most evil on the planet. It would crush them in their false patriotism to have to admit it to themselves, but even harder, to have to admit it to the world.

Setting aside the whole CIA angle, those who argue that Sirhan did not do it always point to the fact that Sirhan approached RFK from the front, while the bullet wound entered from behind at a difference of one inch. What they never provide is a viable alternative suspect. If not Sirhan, then who? Who else was seen firing a 22 caliber revolver at the senator from anywhere near an inch away? It is not enough to point out seeming discrepencies or unanswered questions--you must also provide a believable, logical alternative to the the currently accepted version of events. In this case, any legitimate theory regarding the assassination must include a plausible argument regarding the shooter, including an explanation for how that shooter managed to get himself in a position to shoot Bobby from very close range.

It's simple, he's 81 years old and alive and well, his son David is too. David used his social security number three times after 1984 and before the advent of the internet. A private investigator, found that David's death was never reported to the Social security administration, that there was no other identity attached to David's ssn (119-36-5905) so it wasn't someone trying to falsely obtain credit by using his identity and concluded in the end that he was most likely alive. Can you view David's autopsy photos?...No...Can you view his father's autopsy photos?...No. Follow the yellow brick road. Why would I know this? Close relation.

With regard to the bullets, some of them were lodged in wood around a door and in the ceiling. The LAPD removed all this evidence and then 'lost' it. Thane Caeser may have been involved (the hotel security guard) but I do believe what was shown on this programme. How could 'they'allow Bobby to be elected and then end the Vietnam war and perhaps use the power of the Presidency to investigate his brother's death?

Bobby Kennedy I recall said that America's commitment was to Israel in 1967. This was a referred to in Sirhan's diary. You have to remember what America was like in the 60's as it is now, right wing with a capital R! Sirhan was the perfect patsy, better than LHO.

I'm interested in the other people who were wounded on the night in question. I understand that none of them died, but does anyone know their names or where they are TODAY?

Thank you
Karen Williamson

For the people complaining about no hard facts, here's some to consider.
Autopsy states that wounds were inflicted from a muzzle distance of no more than 1-3 inches from the wounds and from behind RK (due to tattoing), but no eyewitness placed sirhan's gun closer than one and a half feet to the aproacing or side-on RK.
Listen to the opinion of San Quentin Psychologist DR. Eduard Simpson.
Research the absurdity of the Jets deal being the supposed motive and the flawed evidence that was used to prove that.
Why did the LAPD/FBI continually ignore numerous accounts of the PDW and several other men being seen with sirhan on and in the days leading up to the shooting day.
Research sirhan's behaviour changes, 10.oopm normal, 10.30pm fixedly staring at a teletype, 11.45pm looking very tired on pantry table, 12.15am it takes 3o secs for angry crowd to disloge gun, approx 2.00am mumbling under distress to officers, approx 3.45am lively chatting to officers, june 5 during daylight - shivering on a warm june california day.
Like Charles Mansion prosecutor Vince Bugliosi said "The RFK case makes Watergate look like a one-roach marijuana bust"
As rediculous as it sounds, nothing can more adequatley explain the RFK shooting than the notion that sirhan was hypnotically programmed to shoot RK and then have no memory of shooting or the programming.
If you think I'm nuts, the official version is that sirhan programmed himself in front of a mirror to shoot RK and then have no memory of shooting or the programming.
1975 Firearms Panel found no evidence that any of the pantry bullets could be scientifically linked to sirhan's gun, they also found out that during the sirhan trial, the LAPD had compared and matched the pantry bullets to a LAPD test gun - not sirhan's gun.
The sirhan trial was only about determining the sentence, not guilt. The LAPD files weren't released until 1988. At least 3 other witnesses reported at least 3 other gunmen (none of who were SG Cesar). Forget ideological debates and look at the hard evidence and truth, essentially this is just a murder case. If I thought sirhan did in fact fire the shots that killed RK, I would want a screwdriver shoved down his throat. There's a real possibility that sirhan has been siiting in jail for nearly 39 years, when he had no knowlingly part in the shooting - something the RK would be very disappointed about.

With regard to the Warren Commission, I suggest you listen to the following tape of a conversation between then President Johnson and Senator Russell.
President Johnson informs Senator Russell that after Chief Justice Warren twice refused his request to serve on the "Warren" Commission, he told Warren he would release tapes given to him by Director Hoover regarding activities by Warren in Mexico City. (This violates several U.S. laws, including blackmail by the President and Director and the illegal activity of the FBI, a domestic agency, in Mexico.) The tape also reveals that the FBI wrote the Warren Report and the Commission was a cover to prevent a public hearing into the truth.
Also important is the connection between Hoover and the FBI and the CIA. The tapes came to Hoover from the CIA. CIA had a very active station in Mexico City. They had a tap on the Russian Embassy at the time. They knew Oswald was there and had been paid to assassinate Kennedy.
Plainly, the CIA and the FBI engaged in illegal activities in this period of time. Hoover had no business in assisting a President to blackmail. He had no right to prevent the administration of justice by the creation of a "commission" to avoid a resposible prosecutor. The CIA had no business being in LA around Bobby.
Ever wonder who was the CIA station chief in Miami at this period of time? George Bush senior. Enough for now.

One more clue - the boys who were caught in the Watergate hotel, and those running them, were in Dallas.

Karen Williamson

Point taken, but their wounds did not affect the course of history in the way that RFK's death did. As Deeper Throat reveals, the CIA and the FBI were involved in the most undemocratic practices in the 1960's. When JFK was eliminated in '63 the office of President was taken over by people who will always pull the strings. The cover of Mario Puzos novel seems a perverse paradox now.

I believe Kennedy was killed by the CIA. it is that simple.

The man seen in your RFK-CIA segment number 1, at the above link on your site, escorting the man (holding something in his hand and hiding it inside of his suit jacket), is this man named below, one Virgilio Gonzalez of Watergate fame. Incidentally, David Morales was one of the Watergaters as well, right along with Virgilio Gonzalez.

See the resemblance of him at the below link.

I am convinced it is actually him. Stop the segment of the tape right after Virgilio waves his right hand as he is escorting the man concealing something in his jacket while leaving out of the Ambassador, and then compare to the 1972 mugshot and the sideview shot of Virgilio Gonzalez at the provided link and you shall see that it is indeed him.
-----------------------------------

-Gordon Campbell

-George Joannides

-David Morales

-Virgilio Gonzalez

------------------------------------

These are but four, not three (as the ±«Óătv reported in their Newsnight segment) - CIA Operatives filmed that night at the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles the night Bobby Kennedy was killed.

------------------------------------

Virgilio Gonzalez

------------------------------------

The story on ±«Óătv Newsnight

------------------------------------

After much digging, I have found in my personal photo collection, given to me from my late father in law, a photo of one George Joannides taken in Jack Rubys Carousel nightclub.

And yep you guessed it, Jack Ruby is in the very same photo with George Joannides. And more interestingly than that, one Lee Harvey Oswald appears in the very same photo with the both of them.

Any ideas from anyone as to what should be done with this photo? Whom to contact I mean? I have been told it is a very rare and inportant photo.

I am however stumped as to what to do next with it.

Any help would be appreciated.

Richwell Goodlett

Are you kidding, Rich? To my knowledge, there has never been a photo of LHO and Ruby together, although there had been many to testify that they saw them together.
You should contact Debra Conway at JFKLancer.com, the most comprehensive, credible, and supportive websites on the JFK Assassination. She would point you in the safest direction. And for God sakes--don't lose that photo!

I do not know how, but I do know why this happened (now), but I had some "suits" visit my home two days ago and needless to say, they "confiscated" my photo and sent me to the hospital for two days.

I refused to let these "insurance salesman" into my home but I was overpowered and after twenty minutes of "smalltalk" they tired of me and came right out with it (what "they" wanted) and they physically got me and but good. Along with my photo.

They must have been monitoring? the ±«Óătv? Or this forum? Somehow they "found me" and got what they wanted. I have no idea who they were as they didn`t properly introduce themselves to me.

I thought they were going to kill me. At least "they" told me they were. I was in the process of following another posters advice and was going to email Debra Conway at JFK-Lancer and a knock came at my door as I was finishing the email, but I did not get it sent unfortunately.

"They" were driving a black Ford Explorer SUV and then helped themselves into my home.

I live in Missouri, in St Louis should I turn up "missing" for reporting this to this forum.

Please,let the story be told.

Ever hear of Jimmy Hoffa?

"What a Cover up!" How on earth could the World's 'Super Power' allow there own president, JFK, to be assinated (in such a way)? Where was the security procedures to protect JFK through ALL of the diversions he made in person (and open-top car???). Why wasn't the grassy area's that he would of been traveling by protected by his security? All these questions and more failed to be answered. Yes, it was in deed a cover up - by his own people. Bobby Kennedy was obviously part of the same fate to get the Kennedy's out of the White House - and by any means. It is not believed that the secret service and other USA Government authorities could NOT of had any input in these assinations.

Ivor, it comes with the territory of riding in an open top car in front of the public that you can't cover every possible point from which someone could shoot. After all, Reagan was shot too - are you saying that was a conspiracy by the CIA too?

I haven't seem ±«Óătv material yet.
The famous US activist Allard Lowenstein was onto this in the mid 1970s, when he went public with the evidence that he saw and tried to have the case reopened.
Specifically, he wanted the LAPD to fire the supposed gun used to kill RFK to check the ballistics; they refused at that time.

Lowenstein noted that RFK's recently hired guard was armed and standing behind RFK where the shot came from and hadn't been seen since. Spent bullets could not have (all) come from Sirhan's weapon.

Next thing we knew, Lowenstein was shot dead at his law office.

I haven't been able to see the film, but it appears that Shane O'Sullivan's material supports the earlier investigation of Allard Lowenstein.
The famous US activist Allard Lowenstein was onto this in the mid 1970s, when he went public with the evidence that he saw and tried to have the case reopened.
Specifically, he wanted the LAPD to fire the supposed gun used to kill RFK to check the ballistics; they refused at that time.

Lowenstein noted that RFK's recently hired guard was armed and standing behind RFK where the shot came from and hadn't been seen since. Spent bullets could not have (all) come from Sirhan's weapon.

Next thing we knew, Lowenstein was shot dead at his law office.

As most James Bond movies clearly prove, the KGB was obviously behind the entire thing.

Richwell Goodlett are you being serious? If so you have scared the life out of me just for posting my opinion on the assassination. These sites could have career damaging consequences at the very least as I was directed to my comment by Google.

You might consider that disinformation and misinformation being provided here may be by interested parties, i.e. the members or directors of the Plumbers--the republican secret team. The more illiterate scoffing probably comes from Bush's Cubans.

If you can find a photograph of Martinez, one of the Watergate Burglars, notice that his strange hair cut didn't change from the do he sports in his 1963 photograph of him sitting down on the grass of Dealy Plaza next to George H.W. "umbrellaman" Bush on Nov. 22nd 1963.

The bullet that killed Robert Kennedy was of a different caliber than Sirhan's anemic .22 revolver. Explain that.

The bullet that killed Robert Kennedy was of a different caliber than Sirhan's anemic .22 revolver. Explain that.

Well, something has gone wrong, because the link to the video simply brings up the player and the video does not play. Looks like the video has been removed (censured?). The campain videos do play, though...

Very peculiar...