Forrest Gump on the Grassy Knoll

Forrest Gump on the Grassy Knoll
by Jim Fetzer

As a huge fan of actor Tom Hanks, I have admired him in many roles, including Charlie Wilson’s War and Saving Private Ryan. I am also a fan of Leonardo DiCaprio, who became a worldwide phenomenon in Titanic. But I was distressed and dismayed to learn that they had committed to films about the death of JFK – in Tom’s case, one based on Vincent Bugliosi’s Reclaiming History (2008), and in Leonardo’s, based on Lamar Waldron and Thom Hartmann’s Legacy of Secrecy (2008) – which are indefensible books. According to Bugliosi, the Warren commission got it right: Lee Harvey Oswald was indeed "the lone assassin," where he claims to have refuted alternative "conspiracy theories." According to Waldron and Hartmann, JFK was planning to assassinate Fidel, when the mob learned of the plan and took JFK out first, using its insider’s knowledge of the plot against Fidel to silence Bobby and preclude his pursuit of the guilty. The problem is that both theories are false.


Not only am I a fan of these actors but I have met Vincent Bugliosi. In my library downstairs, for example, I have a framed photo of Jesse Ventura, Vince and me at dinner in a restaurant in Minneapolis, when he came to present a lecture at the Hamlin University School of Law on 7 April 2003. We had a great time, and I admire many of his books, from Helter Skelter (about the Charles Manson case) and Outrage (why O.J. Simpson was guilty of killing both Ron and Nicole) to The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder (for war crimes and other atrocities). I like most of his books and have greatly admired him in the past. Similarly, I enjoy listening to Thom Hartmann over our local progressive radio station, "The Mic" at 92.1 FM in Madison, including his "Brunch with Bernie" Friday segments. I share many beliefs and values with Vince and with Thom about truth, justice and the American way. But on JFK, they are trading in fiction, not fact.


I know because I organized a research group consisting of the best-qualified students to ever study the case, including Robert B. Livingston, M.D., a world-authority on the human brain and an expert on wound ballistics; David W. Mantik, M.D., Ph.D., who is board certified in radiation oncology and an expert on the interpretation of X-rays; a physician, Charles Crenshaw, M.D., who had attended the moribund president when he was brought to Parkland Hospital after the shooting and then, two days later, his alleged assassin after he, too, had been shot; a legendary photo-analyst, Jack White, who testified before the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) when it reinvestigated the case in 1977–78, explaining a dozen or more indications that the infamous "backyard photographs" were fake; and another Ph.D. in physics, John P. Costella, whose specialization in electromagnetism, the properties of light, and the physics of moving objects enabled him to help prove the Zapruder film is a fraud.

On 3 March 2010, The Huffington Post published a piece about Tom Hanks, which included his comments about producing a television mini-series based on Bugliosi’s Reclaiming History: "We're going to do the American public a service," Hanks says. "A lot of conspiracy types are going to be upset. If we do it right it'll perhaps be one of the most controversial things that has ever been on TV." Whether or not he knew it, I knew that I was one of those he had in mind, having published three books on the assassination, chaired or co-chaired four national conferences about it, and given hundreds of lectures and interviews about it. On more than one occasion, I appealed to Vince not to publish his book on JFK, but to no avail. Even though he did acknowledge that mine are the only three "exclusively scientific" books about the death of our 35th president – in which I publish studies on different aspects of the case by qualified experts – he sailed ahead in reckless disregard for our findings.


The Falsifying Findings


According to The Warren Report (1964), a lone, demented former Marine named Lee Oswald fired three shots from the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository, with a World War II vintage Italian-made, 6.5mm Mannlicher-Carcano, scoring two hits and killing JFK. Originally, the FBI and the Secret Service concluded that all three shots had hit, one striking JFK in the back about 5.5 inches below the collar, the second hitting Texas Governor John Connally in the back, and the third hitting JFK in the head. When it was discovered that one shot had missed and pieces of curbing had slightly injured bystander James Tague, the commission had to revise those findings and claim that the bullet that hit JFK in the back actually struck the base of the back of his neck and had exited his throat and injured Connally – a bullet that emerged virtually pristine and has come to be known as the "magic" bullet. Our research has demonstrated, however, that this account cannot possibly be true.


* According to The Warren Report, The HSCA Final Report, and articles in the Journal of the AMA, our 35th president was killed by high-velocity bullets, which have muzzle velocities of 2,600 fps or higher. The Mannlicher-Carcano only has a muzzle velocity of 2,000 fps, however, which means that it is only a medium velocity and not a high-velocity weapon, as other authors – Harold Weisberg, Whitewash (1965), Peter Model and Robert Groden, JFK: The Case for Conspiracy (1976), and Robert Groden and Harrison Livingstone, High Treason (1989) – have also observed. Insofar as this is the only weapon that Oswald has ever been alleged to have used to shoot JFK, he cannot possibly have fired the bullets that killed him.


* According to The Warren Report, The HSCA Final Report, and other sources, the assassin was situated in the south-west corner of the Book Depository during the assassination, which took place at 12:30 PM on 22 November 1963. William Shelly, however, saw Oswald on the 2nd floor near the lunchroom when he (Shelly) came down to eat lunch; at Noon, Eddie Piper saw him on the 1st floor, when he (Oswald) told him (Piper) he was going up to eat; at 12:15 PM, Carolyn Arnold, the executive secretary to the Vice President, saw him sitting in the lunchroom; and again at 12:25 she observed him, but on the 1st floor near the front door. Within 90 seconds after the assassination, Motorcycle Officer Marrion Baker confronted him in the lunchroom and held him in his sights until Roy Truly, his supervisor, assured the officer that he belonged there. They both reported that Oswald was not breathing heavily or perspiring but acting normally – not what would be expected if he had run down from the 6th floor.


* Later, when she was interrogated, his wife, Marina, stated that Lee admired JFK and bore him no malice. During his recent "Conspiracy Theory" program on the assassination, broadcast on TruTV on Friday, 19 November 2010, Jesse Ventura had the opportunity to talk with Marina, who did not want her face shown on television because she lives in fear for the life of her children – nearly 50 years later. Jesse had 2.5 hours to talk with her, however, and she said that, although at one time she had thought Lee had done it, she was now convinced he was innocent and had been working undercover for the government. This conjecture had even been confirmed by the Attorney General for Texas, Waggoner Carr, who had launched his own investigation and found that Lee was working as an informant for the FBI, had been assigned informant number 179, and was being paid $200 per month right up to the time of the assassination. That may be why his W-2 forms have never been released, as if the IRS couldn’t get hold of them, which is a unique event in American history!

More Problems for Bugliosi


What this means is that the man The Warren Commission fingered for the crime had neither the means, the motive nor the opportunity to have committed the crime. Most of what I have just said, however, has long been known to serious students of the assassination as long ago as the book by Mark Lane, Rush To Judgment (1967). The reason why it has been so difficult to crack is that the government produced X-rays and photographs that suggested the two bullets that hit JFK had been fired from above and behind – the official location of the shooter. It would not be until 1992 when David W. Mantik began to study the X-rays in the National Archives and discovered that they had been altered and Robert B. Livingston announced that the brain shown in diagrams and photographs could not be the brain of JFK – based upon his study of the doctors’ reports from Parkland Hospital – that the case the commission had endorsed began to suffer its most significant damage.

* Mantik obtained permission to study the autopsy X-rays, borrowing a technique from physics known as optical densitometry that enabled him to identify regions of the X-rays that were abnormal, including a region on the right lateral-cranial X-ray (of his skull taken from the side), which had been "patched" to conceal a massive blow-out at the back of the head, which corroborated the reports from the Parkland physicians that he had a major defect at the back of his head. When he studied the anterior-posterior X-ray (of the skull taken from the front), he found a 6.5mm slice of metal, which had apparently been added to the X-ray (in the darkroom) after they were taken from the morgue by Secret Service Agent Roy Kellerman. So the reason the HSCA had discounted more than 40 eyewitness reports of a massive blow-out at the back of his head was wrong and could no longer be defeated by the X-rays.


* Livingston studied the reports from the physicians at Parkland, who, unlike the pathologists at Bethesda, were well-experienced with gunshot wounds. One after another – including Charles Crenshaw, M.D., Marion Jenkins, M.D., Charles Carrico, M.D., Malcolm Perry, M.D., Robert McClelland, M.D., Charles Baxter, M.D., and Kemp Clark, M.D., the Director of Neurosurgery – they reported that both cerebral and cerebellar tissue had been extruding from the wound. When Livingston compared their consistent and detailed reports with the diagrams and photographs of a brain at the National Archives, which shows only slight damage and a completely intact cerebellum, he was obligated to conclude that the brain shown in the diagrams and photographs could not be the brain of John Fitzgerald Kennedy. Once they had "patched" the massive defect to the back of the head, where was no place for that tissue to go, so they simply substituted another man’s brain.

Dr.David Mantik

* These discoveries were astonishing enough, but an even more important discovery would follow from them: that the home movie of the assassination (associated with Abraham Zapruder) had been edited to conceal the true causes of JFK’s death. There were reasons to suspect the film had been re-created – by removing some events and adding others – since there were more than 59 witnesses who reported that the vehicle either had slowed dramatically or had come to a complete stop. The back-and-to-the left motion of the body, in fact, was not reported by any of the witnesses in Dealey Plaza, even though it is the most striking feature of the extant film. And his brains had been blown-out to the left-rear and had struck a motorcycle patrolman with such force he thought he himself had been shot. Yet the film shows brains bulging out to the right-front, giving the impression of a shot from above and behind.


He Should Have Known Better


What bothers me is that these crucial findings – for which we have adduced abundant proof – had been published in Assassination Science (1998), Murder In Dealey Plaza (2000), and The Great Zapruder Film Hoax (2003) at least five years before Bugliosi published his massive tome. As David W. Mantik observes in his review of Reclaiming History, although I had laid out "16 smoking guns" in Prologue to Murder, "authentic discussion of our paradoxes was, by and large, quite off limits. There was a lot of palaver about many other things but little at all about the central 16 – or [his] "20 Conclusions [after nine visits to the National Archives]." Nor did he take up the challenge of defeating our argument about the fabrication of the film, which includes a visual tutorial by John P. Costella explaining how we know that the film has been faked. This means our major findings remain unchallenged."

Instead, Vince placed his faith in an argument about several bullet fragments that had been found in the front floor of the limousine. The claim that neutron-activation analysis (NAA) had shown the fragments to have come from allotments of WWII Mannlicher-Carcano ammunition (on the basis of the analysis of its trace mineral composition with respect to their percentage of zinc, arsenic, lead and other elements) had convinced Robert Blakey, Executive Directory of the HSCA, that Oswald had been the lone assassin. Alas, as Mantik explains, the assumption of homogeneous composition of the Italian ammunition – which used recycled lead – was seriously flawed and therefore NAA could not be used to justify claims about their common origin. (Indeed, a recent article by Gary Aguilar, M.D., "Is Vincent Bugliosi Right that Neutron Activation Analysis Proves Oswalds Guilt?" has put the final nail in its coffin.) And, as I observed in my review of Bugliosi’s book, had they come from a Mannlicher-Carcano or even from the same weapon, that would not have proven the location from which they were fired or by whom. But this means that Bugliosi’s principal scientific argument was misconceived from the beginning.


Indeed, Bugliosi contends that Oswald was too unstable and insufficiently reliable for the CIA or the Mafia to have depended upon him to carry off the biggest murder in American history. After all, given the official story, he had defected to the Soviet Union, slashed his wrist trying to commit suicide, behaved erratically in New Orleans, and lived the life of a loner. Why would the CIA or the Mafia have trusted him? If Lee had been part of a conspiracy, as soon as he departed from the building, a car would have been waiting to take him to his death. Instead, he becomes the first successful assassin in history to make his escape by public transportation! Bugliosi, alas!, appears unable to appreciate that the same reasons he offers for why Oswald might not have been an appropriate choice to serve as an assassin are excellent reasons why he would have made a great selection in a conspiracy to serve as the patsy! Jesse Ventura made this point with devastating effect during his stunning exposure of Vince during their confrontation in the JFK segment of "Conspiracy Theory".


Impending Disaster


If the planned mini-series based upon Reclaiming History starring Tom Hanks should make it to the small screen, his own remarks ("A lot of conspiracy types are going to be upset. If we do it right it'll perhaps be one of the most controversial things that has ever been on TV") are going to play out in ways he no doubt did not intend. On 19 November 2010, an announcement appeared that Leonardo DiCaprio is set to star in and produce "Legacy of Secrecy", a movie based on the book by Lamar Waldron and Thom Hartmann about the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. The authors claim that JFK and RFK were planning a covert coup in Cuba, that the mob got wind of it and wacked JFK, then covered its back by threatening to expose the coup plans if RFK went after them. And they insist that LBJ and the FBI were not complicit in the crime. It has received rave praise, such as the following:


"I believe Waldron's heavy-to-lift book is actually all but the last word on these troubling assassinations which have been so wildly speculated about since 1963 . . . Lamar Waldron, indefatigable public servant and author deserves his own Pulitzer Prize for his great work." – Liz Smith, New York Post


"They’ve done a service by digging up the deepest, darkest, most disturbing archival evidence to support their Mob hit theory." – Ron Rosenbaum


"Staggering!" – Mark Crispin Mill


"Exhaustively researched" – New York Observer


"[Legacy of Secrecy contains] over 800 pages of intricately documented data. Their findings add pieces to one of our most perplexing puzzles, and suggest where the key missing pieces may be found." – Ronald Goldfarb, Daily Beast


Unfortunately, their scenario is completely ludicrous. (1) After the abortive "Bay of Pigs" fiasco, JFK had entered into agreements with the Soviet Union that the US would not invade Cuba, which he could not have broken, even covertly, without profoundly tarnishing his reputation and that of the US. (2) There are more than 15 indications of Secret Service complicity in setting him up for the hit. (3) The autopsy X-rays were altered to conceal a massive blow-out to the back of the head and by adding a 6.5 mm metallic slice. And (4) the home movie of the assassination was re-created to remove incriminating evidence, including that the driver, William Greer, brought the limousine to a halt after bullets began to be fired. Once JFK was dead, RFK was rendered powerless, sandwiched between his powerful superior, LBJ, and his nominal subordinate, J. Edgar Hoover, both of whom appear to have been deeply involved in planning for JFK’s death and then covering it up. None of this could have been arranged by the mob.


No doubt, the mob wanted to regain control of its resorts and casinos in Havana, where it had been running the largest money-laundering operation in the Western Hemisphere. If JFK and RFK were going to take out Castro, the mob would have waited until after that had been accomplished. The book appears to have been inspired, in part, by a misunderstood contingency plan for an operation of this kind, one that was filed and forgotten. Even Robert McNamara had never even heard of it; yet its execution was allegedly only weeks away when the mob took Jack out. The idea that JFK could be planning something like this without the knowledge of his close and trusted Secretary of Defense verges on the absurd. And, as other, more qualified sources, including Robert Dalleck, An Unfinished Life (2003), have also explained, JFK was planning to promote a new era of less stressful and far more peaceful relations with the USSR, including the normalization of relations with Cuba.


Tom Hanks and Leonardo DiCaprio have now embarked upon a voyage into the unknown, which is rife with hazards of which they appear to be blithely unaware. Bugliosi is an impressive prosecutor, but he knows very little about the alteration of X-rays or the fabrication of films. He produced a brilliant brief in his zeal to convince his readers that Oswald committed the crime. If Oswald didn’t do it, then the Mafia would be a serious alternative, which Robert Blakey pushed when The HSCA Final Report (1979) appeared. 
But the mob could not have altered X-rays under control of medical officers of the US Navy, agents of the Secret Service, or the president’s own personal physician. Neither pro- nor anti-Castro Cubans could have substituted another brain for that of JFK. And even if the Soviets had the capacity to fabricate movies comparable to that of the CIA and Hollywood, it would have been unable to get its hands on the Zapruder film. These things could only have been done with complicity from the highest levels of the American government. There are books worth producing as mini-series and as films, especially ones by James Douglass, JFK and the Unspeakable (2008), and by Phillip Nelson, LBJ: Mastermind of JFK's Assassination (2010). The situation is not unlike that of those who controlled a magnificent ship, thought to be unsinkable, steaming blissfully ahead and unaware of its destiny. They bought the wrong books.

---

Special thanks to David W. Mantik for his comments and suggestions on this article.


December 17, 2010


Jim Fetzer [send him mail], a former Marine Corps officer who earned his Ph.D. in the history and the philosophy of science, is McKnight Professor Emeritus at the Duluth campus of the University of Minnesota. He co-edits assassinationresearch.com with John Costella. He is the editor of The Place of Probability in Science.


From the article first printed Dec.17, 2010, Copyright © 2010 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.

####

Read More

Assange Case: Sweden, Britain, and Interpol Insult Rape Victims Worldwide

J'Accuse: Sweden, Britain, and Interpol Insult Rape Victims Worldwide

by Naomi Wolf     Dec. 13, 2010

How do I know that Interpol, Britain and Sweden's treatment of Julian Assange is a form of theater? Because I know what happens in rape accusations against men that don't involve the embarrassing of powerful governments.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is in solitary confinement in Wandsworth prison in advance of questioning on state charges of sexual molestation. Lots of people have opinions about the charges. But I increasingly believe that only those of us who have spent years working with rape and sexual assault survivors worldwide, and know the standard legal response to sex crime accusations, fully understand what a travesty this situation is against those who have to live through how sex crime charges are ordinarily handled -- and what a deep, even nauseating insult this situation is to survivors of rape and sexual assault worldwide.

Assange: recently released --under stringent conditions

Here is what I mean: men are pretty much never treated the way Assange is being treated in the face of sex crime charges.

I started working as a counselor in a UK center for victims of sexual assault in my mid-twenties. I also worked as a counselor in a battered women's shelter in the US, where sexual violence was often part of the pattern of abuse. I have since spent two decades traveling the world reporting on and interviewing survivors of sexual assault, and their advocates, in countries as diverse as Sierra Leone and Morocco, Norway and Holland, Israel and Jordan and the Occupied Territories, Bosnia and Croatia, Britain, Ireland and the united States.

I tell you this as a recorder of firsthand accounts. Tens of thousand of teenage girls were kidnapped at gunpoint and held as sex slaves in Sierra Leone during that country's civil war. They were tied to trees and to stakes in the ground and raped by dozens of soldiers at a time. Many of them were as young as twelve or thirteen. Their rapists are free.

Rape victims in a destroyed hamlet near Magburaka. Photo by Phillip C. Winslow

I met a fifteen-year-old girl who risked her life to escape from her captor in the middle of the night, taking the baby that resulted from her rape by hundreds of men. She walked from Liberia to a refugee camp in Sierra Leone, barefoot and bleeding, living on roots in the bush. Her rapist, whose name she knows, is free.

Generals at every level instigated this country-wide sexual assault of a generation of girls. Their names are known. They are free. In Sierra Leone and Congo, rapists often used blunt or sharp objects to penetrate the vagina. Vaginal tears and injuries, called vaginal fistulas, are rampant, as any health worker in that region can attest, but medical care is often unavailable. So women who have been raped in this way often suffer from foul-smelling constant discharges from infections that could be treated with a low-cost antibiotic -- were one available. Because of their injuries, they are shunned by their communities and rejected by their husbands. Their rapists are free.

Women -- and girls -- are drugged, kidnapped and trafficked by the tens of thousands for the sex industry in Thailand and across Eastern Europe. They are held as virtual prisoners by pimps. If you interview the women who spend their lives trying to rescue and rehabilitate them, they attest to the fact that these women's kidnappers and rapists are well known to local and even national authorities -- but these men never face charges. These rapists are free.

In the Bosnian conflict, rape was a weapon of war. Women were imprisoned in barracks utilized for this purpose, and raped, again at gunpoint, for weeks at a time. They could not escape. Minimalist hearings after the conflict resulted in slap-on-the-wrist sentences for a handful of perpetrators. The vast majority of rapists, whose names are known, did not face charges. The military who condoned these assaults, whose names are known, are free.

Women who testify to having been raped in Saudi Arabia, Syria and Morocco face imprisonment and beatings, and being abandoned by their families. Their rapists almost never face charges and are free. Women who testify to rape in India and Pakistan have been subjected to honor killings and acid attacks. Their rapists almost never face charges, are almost never convicted. They are free. A well-known case of a high-born playboy in India who was accused of violently raping a waitress -- who was willing to testify against him -- resulted in a cover-up at the highest levels of the police inquiry. He is free.

What about more typical cases closer to home? In the Western countries such as Britain and Sweden, who are uniting to hold Assange without bail, if you actually interviewed women working in rape crisis centers, you will hear this: it is desperately hard to get a conviction for a sex crime, or even a serious hearing. Workers in rape crisis centers in the UK and Sweden will tell you that they have deep backlogs of women raped for years by fathers or stepfathers -- who can't get justice. Women raped by groups of young men who have been drinking, and thrown out of the backs of cars, or abandoned after a gang-rape in an alley -- who can't get justice. Women raped by acquaintances who can't get a serious hearing.

"....Yet three-quarters of local authorities have no services for rape victims, and only one in twenty rapes reported to the police leads to a conviction. This failure to bring rapists to justice amounts to a near licence to rape."  (Ref: Fawcett Society, UK)

In the US I have heard from dozens of young women who have been drugged and raped in college campuses across the nation. There is almost inevitably a cover-up by the university -- guaranteed if their assailants are prominent athletes on campus, or affluent -- and their rapists are free. If it gets to police inquiry, it seldom gets very far. Date rape? Forget it. If a woman has been drinking, or has previously had consensual sex with her attacker, or if there is any ambiguity about the issue of consent, she almost never gets a serious hearing or real investigation.

If the rare middle-class woman who charges rape against a stranger -- for those inevitably are the few and rare cases that the state bothers to hear -- actually gets treated seriously by the legal system, she will nonetheless find inevitable hurdles to any kind of real hearing let alone real conviction: either a 'lack of witnesses' or problems with evidence, or else a discourse that even a clear assault is racked with ambiguity. If, even more rare, a man is actually convicted -- it will almost inevitably be a minimal sentence, insulting in its triviality, because no one wants to 'ruin the life' of a man, often a young man, who has 'made a mistake'. (The few exceptions tend to regard a predictable disparity of races -- black men do get convicted for assault on higher-status white women whom they do not know.)

In other words: Never in twenty-three years of reporting on and supporting victims of sexual assault around the world have I ever heard of a case of a man sought by two nations, and held in solitary confinement without bail in advance of being questioned -- for any alleged rape, even the most brutal or easily proven. In terms of a case involving the kinds of ambiguities and complexities of the alleged victims' complaints -- sex that began consensually that allegedly became non-consensual when dispute arose around a condom -- please find me, anywhere in the world, another man in prison today without bail on charges of anything comparable.

Of course 'No means No', even after consent has been given, whether you are male or female; and of course condoms should always be used if agreed upon. As my fifteen-year-old would say: Duh.

But for all the tens of thousands of women who have been kidnapped and raped, raped at gunpoint, gang-raped, raped with sharp objects, beaten and raped, raped as children, raped by acquaintances -- who are still awaiting the least whisper of justice -- the highly unusual reaction of Sweden and Britain to this situation is a slap in the face. It seems to send the message to women in the UK and Sweden that if you ever want anyone to take sex crime against you seriously, you had better be sure the man you accuse of wrongdoing has also happened to embarrass the most powerful government on earth.

Keep Assange in prison without bail until he is questioned, by all means, if we are suddenly in a real feminist worldwide epiphany about the seriousness of the issue of sex crime: but Interpol, Britain and Sweden must, if they are not to be guilty of hateful manipulation of a serious women's issue for cynical political purposes, imprison as well -- at once -- the hundreds of thousands of men in Britain, Sweden and around the world world who are accused in far less ambiguous terms of far graver forms of assault.

Anyone who works in supporting women who have been raped knows from this grossly disproportionate response that Britain and Sweden, surely under pressure from the US, are cynically using the serious issue of rape as a fig leaf to cover the shameful issue of mafioso-like global collusion in silencing dissent. That is not the State embracing feminism. That is the State pimping feminism.

Naomi Wolf

Bestselling Author, The End of America: Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot

Read More

"MUAD'DIB" AND HIS CLASH WITH THE NEW WORLD ORDER: A FRIEND CHECKS IN

"MUAD'DIB" AND HIS CLASH WITH THE NEW WORLD ORDER: A FRIEND CHECKS IN
A close friend of Muad'Dib, whose name is "Rob", has sent me an extremely interesting outline of his take on "The New World Order".   Since what he has to say makes more sense to me than anything else I have read about it, I wanted to share it.  He begins by responding to an exchange in which I am engaged on scientificamerican.com, which was initiated by a column written by Michael Shermer, who is the editor of SKEPTIC magazine.   The link to this exchange is  http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-conspiracy-theory-director&page=2&posted=1&posted=1
_________________________

On the New World Order
 
by Rob
 
Thank-you for sending the link to the Michael Shermer article "The Conspiracy Theory Detector" in SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN and sharing your comments.  The very title of his article is proof of who he is working for and the disinformation media machine that THEY own and use to their benefit.  I use the term "THEY", which is from the John Carpenter film "THEY LIVE" and is an acronym meaning "The Hierarchy Enslaving You".  THEY refers to the New World Order International Banksters, who are known by many names and organizations they have created (e.g. Illuminati, Builderbergs, CFR, Trilateral Commission, Committee of 300, etc.).  THEY are the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Warburgs, etc. using their private banking institutions, i.e. the U.S. Federal Reserve, the Bank of England, the IMF, the World Bank, etc. to own and control the entire world.  THEY are also known as the hidden hand.

Obviously the Federal Reserve Bank is a misnomer purposely meant to deceive.  The Federal Bank isn't "federal" and it has absolutely nothing in reserve.  It isn't really even a "bank".  It is a private corporation, as you probably know, that is being used to fraudulently steal the wealth of the nation from the American people just like the Bank of England is doing to the British and all of the Commonwealth countries, through usury and the creation of money out of thin-air.  All these things are made possible by fraudulent legislation that THEY have their puppet politicians enact, which began with the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. 

Both the Federal Reserve Bank and the Bank of England are private banks working as front companies to an alliance of six major international banks, often referred to as the Big Six Beast Banks: Bank of America, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, HSBC Group, Inter-Allied Group, and JP Morgan Chase. The two banking cartel families at the top of all of this are the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers, who in turn are intermarried and inter-related to every major Royal Family in Europe: The British, Dutch, Spanish, Norwegian and Greek Royal Families to name the most important ones.  A primer article on the NWO can be found at http://www.educate-yourself.org/nwo/, which includes a link to the Tavistock Clinic that you might find informative as well.  If you are interested in a copy of the Conspirators' Hierarchy: The Story of the Committee of 300, published in 1992 by Dr. John Coleman, that is referenced in the primer article, please let me know and I can provide you with a copy of the study, which is extremely thorough.

Mayer Amschel Rothschild is quoted as saying "I care not who makes a country's laws as long as I make their money" which was a LIE.  Rothschild was a CONMAN and he judged everyone by his own standards and assumed that everyone was like him and had their price. Unfortunately, it appears he was right about the majority of people. The fact that the New World Order got their puppet politicians to enact the Federal Reserve Act in 1913, and the fact that they had John F. Kennedy killed when he went to repeal it, is proof that Rothschild lied.

The powerbase of the NWO is their ability to enact fraudulent legislation.  Take away all of these fraudulent man-made laws that they have been using to "legally" set up their monetary policy and private banking institutions in virtually every country in the world, and their entire house of cards will come tumbling down.  If we don't make their puppet politicians back down, and repeal all of this fraudulent legislation—the same kind of legislation that is being used against John Hill (JAH/Muad'Dib) right now to supposedly make telling the truth a crime—then the NWO will continue to manipulate the world into what THEY want it to be, which most people don't realize eventually includes the extermination of 90% of the world's "useless eaters" (consumers) in this never ending war on terror, which is really a war OF terror. 

THEY control both sides of the isle in Congress and in Parliament, so they couldn't care less about which political party is in office or power.  THEY fund both sides of every war because bankrolling arms sales and lending money to governments on both sides of a conflict that THEY created is an extremely profitable business and also helps consolidate their power and control.  THEY are into and controlling EVERYTHING, including the mass media propaganda machine, the legal system and organized religion, of which the RCC is the largest.

The Vatican rules over approximately 2 billion of the world’s 6.5 billion people. The colossal wealth of the Vatican includes enormous investments with the Rothschilds in Britain, France, and the USA, and with giant oil and weapons corporations like Shell and General Electric. The Vatican solid gold bullion, worth billions, is stored with the Rothschild controlled Bank of England and the Federal Reserve Bank.  It is interesting to note that Vatican city is not part of Rome or Italy just as the District of Columbia is not part of the United States and the inner city of London isn't part of London or England.  These cities called “city states” have their own independent flag, their own separate laws, and their own separate identity.

The Roman Catholic church is the biggest business empire on the planet, possessing more material wealth than any bank, corporation, giant trust, or government anywhere on the globe.  They are the biggest financial power, wealth accumulator, and property owner in existence. The Pope, who is the visible ruler of this colossal global wealth, is one of the richest men on Earth. While two-thirds of the world earns less than two dollars a day, and one-fifth of the world is under fed or starving to death, the Vatican hordes the world’s wealth and their massive profits from it in the stock market, whilst at the same time preaching about giving.  Christ told us that we CANNOT serve God (the greater good) and money/materialism (Matthew 6:24), so how then can they possibly claim to be working for God and the greater good?  It should be noted that ALL other religions, including the rest of Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. are doing the very same thing, albeit not quite as successfully as the RCC or with as visible a ruler.

Similarly, Elizabeth Mountbatten, who is also known by the aliases "Windsor" and "QE 2", is the richest woman on Earth, whilst hundreds of thousands of British people are homeless, with millions living in relative poverty and she has political parties of both left and right, in her illegal democracy.  She is the head of the Committee of 300 and the head of the Church of England, and the head of ALL of the Commonwealth countries, not to mention her stock ownership in oil, minerals, gold and many other holdings.  Elizabeth Mountbatten has managed to keep the TRUTH about the British people's true identity from them just as she has kept from them that she is actually a FRAUD and not really the rightful heir to the British Throne, as evidenced by the fact that she was knowingly crowned on a fake coronation stone.  IF the British people knew the truth about these things they would LAWFULLY demand the monarchy give back the wealth it has defrauded the people out of, using its own fraudulent and illegal laws and taxes.  Please see http://jahtruth.net/britmon for the truth about the British Monarchy.

This is all part of the real reason that John Hill is currently imprisoned in England.  THEY don't want the British people nor the rest of the world to know who was really behind the 7/7 London bombings, and the "7/7 Ripple Effect" is embarrassing them and exposing the truth.  THEY are punishing John Hill in the hope of making an example of Him and silencing everyone who speaks the truth.  It is why THEY coined the term "conspiracy theory" and then had their propaganda machines go to work on programming the masses into believing that anyone who didn't believe their official nonsense must be crazy, just as the first comment under the above-referenced SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN article stated.  In the face of the overwhelming evidence that 7/7 was an inside job, just like 911 and Madrid (which took place 911 days after 911) were inside jobs, how could any rationally-minded person not come to the conclusion that both events were the result of a global conspiracy?  False flag terrorists attacks following the exact same template and happening in different parts of the world are undeniable PROOF that there is a global conspiracy.

John Hill (JAH/Muad'Dib) has known this for quite some time and has been working diligently to make others aware of it and to teach us all by example what the right thing is to do and how to do it without fear.  He knows better than most what is at stake and that the only way we can all avoid another 911, Madrid or 7/7—or worse—is to open our eyes and let the puppet politicians know that we all know what they are up to and will be watching them to make sure they don't get away with it again.  The politicians have to be more afraid of the people than they are of their NWO puppet masters or they will continue to work for the NWO to enslave everyone that survives this war of terror.

WHO IS "MAUD'DIB" (ANTHONY JOHN HILL)?  

"Friends of Muad'Dib"  (http://mtrial.org/) have this to say:

Anthony John Hill, aged 62, also known as “Muad’Dib”, the producer of the documentary film,“7/7 Ripple Effect”, has been charged with “intending to pervert the course of justice,” after counter-terrorism police investigated him for sending copies of his film to the British court, requesting the court administrators deliver them to the judge and jury-foreman in a trial related to the London Underground bombings on July 7th, 2005.  This has always been common practice in Britain, as people send opinions or evidence, openly or anonymously, to courthouses all the time, acting as an “amicus curiae” (a friend of the court).
Now—posting DVDs to a court is a crime—and possibly “terrorism"?
Do you feel safer?  Or have things gone too far?
The DVD film itself,“7/7 Ripple Effect”, has gained international notoriety for using official government and mainstream media reports to highlight irregularities and impossibilities in the Home Office’s official take, and then re-take, on what happened.  Initially dismissed by many as “conspiracy theory”, recent testimony at the 7/7 inquest, in tandem with deeper independent investigations over the years, is increasingly proving that the film is more fact than theory—putting the government in an uncomfortable situation.

Those who are not "friends of Muad'Dib" have an entirely different viewpoint of Hill.  Their vilification of Hill is proceeding apace, as this "portrait" suggests.  Hill is easy to mockbecause he has written a complex Biblical-style set of writings -- available at  jahtruth.net/twh.pdf  -- which display not only a deep knowledge of most known traditional and contemporary religious systems, beliefs and legends,but also incorporates science fiction films and a methodology to defeat the New World Order into a theological format that appeals to some people yearning for a kinder and better Order in modern life.

However, these writings leave Hill wide open to accusations that he's a mentally unstable fruitcake.  Without presuming to pass judgment on Hill's revelations and writings in their religious context, which have been around for some time, his statements concerning the 7/7/05 London attacks, known through his DVD,  "7/7 Ripple Effect"  (Ref: http://jforjustice.co.uk/77/) offer some solid facts and intelligent statements that are indeed revelatory.

Perhaps not surprisingly, whistleblowers John Hill, and Wikileaks leader Julian Assange areboth being being held in London's Wandsworth prison.  Julian Assange’s own former Wikileaks associates are speaking out about Julian helping to cover-up evidence regarding how the US and Britain lied to get into the middle-eastern wars in the first place. Mr. Assange would also prefer that people don’t find out about his deals with Israeli figures like Benjamin Netanyahu. Assange also has plenty of access to the media, many think too much access, and through the above, it becomes clear that he is either working for the Establishment willingly, or as a dupe.

Read More