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

The JFK "Head Shot" Paradox

The JFK “Head Shot” Paradox*

                        by Jim Fetzer
by Ralph
                 Recently by Jim Fetzer: The Place of Probability in Science

As a philosopher of science with a keen interest in the nature of scientific knowledge, I have been fascinated by the recent book by G. Paul Chambers, Head Shot: The Science Behind the JFK Assassination (2010). I have found several aspects of his discussion of interest, including his conclusion—that the fatal shot to JFK’s head seen in the Zapruder film was caused by a shot from the right-front (“the grassy knoll”)—which he affirms on the basis of his competence as a physicist.  He does not seem to notice that JFK’s brains and blood are blown out to the right-front in the Zapruder film, which he takes to be authentic and unaltered.  But that means there is a paradox in his analysis, since, if the film is authentic, the blow-out to the right-front contradicts his conclusion that the shot that caused this effect was fired from the right-front, which is founded on elementary laws of physics. This, in turn, implies that he has not taken into account all the relevant evidence and thereby violated a basic principle of scientific reasoning, which may be appropriate for politicians, editorial writers, and used-car salesmen, but not for him.

Sample bullet entry defect

Sample bullet exit defect

Indeed, it is precisely because the back-and-to-the-left motion of his body provides such a simple proof of a shot fired from the right-front that those who have written extensively about it, such as Robert Groden and Josiah Thompson, have been adamantly opposed to acknowledging that the film is a fabrication, which was recreated using original footage which was subjected to sophisticated techniques of optical printing and special effects.  A brilliant tutorial concerning how we know this was done has been presented by John P. Costella, another Ph.D. in physics with electromagnetism, the physics of moving objects and properties of light, among his areas of specialization.  Previous arguments of David Wrone and Rollie Zavada, which Chambers presents, have been refuted by the publication of Inside the ARRB (2009) by Douglas Horne, whose key arguments about the film are summarized in an article of mine for those who may not have time for all five volumes!


Chambers’ discussions of the Zapruder film, whose authenticity he endorses, and of the medical evidence, which he disregards as corrupt, are especially interesting.  Perhaps if he had read Assassination Science (1998), Murder in Dealey Plaza (2000), and The Great Zapruder Film Hoax (2003), which are devoted to taking rumor and speculation out of the case and placing its study on an objective and scientific foundation, he might have a different outlook on both.  Not the least puzzling aspect of this book is that, while his credentials as a physicist are advanced as the reason we should believe him (based upon his analysis of the motion of JFK’s head under the impact of the bullet), no one who has ever observed the film could have any serious doubt that it was fired from the right-front. The back-and-to-the-left motion of his body, which was accentuated in Oliver Stone’s “JFK”, makes that much obvious.  You don’t have to be a Ph.D. in physics to notice.

As Horne has explained, there are five physical features that distinguish the original film, which was developed in Dallas, from the film that is available to us today.  As he also remarks, the original was brought to the National Photographic Interpretation Center on Saturday, 23 November 1963, and processed by one team of experts, while a second film was brought to the NPIC the following day, Sunday, 24 November 1963, and processed by a different team of experts.  We not only know that the films are different based upon their physical properties but from the occurrence of content anomalies found in the extant film. Some the most revealing content features that indicate it is a fabrication include the driver’s head turns (looking back toward JFK and then forward after he has been killed), which, as Noel Twyman, Bloody Treason (1997), has reported, occur twice as fast as humanly possible; that no witnesses reported the back-and-to-the-left motion seen in the extant film; and that Secret Service agents were nauseated to see JFK’s brains and blood across the trunk of the limousine in Washington, which has been “tidied” up in the film.

Roderick Ryan, a Hollywood expert on special effects whom Noel consulted about the blow-out to the right-front, explained to him that it and the blood spray had been painted in.  A new group of Hollywood experts has now concluded that the blow-out itself was painted over in black to conceal the massive defect, as Horne explains in Volume IV of Inside the ARRB.  But while there are many indications that the film is a fabrication, the most important proof is the inconsistency between the impact damage to the cranium, which is the film's most stunning feature, showing brains and gore bulging out to JFK's right-front, and the medical evidence, which shows a massive defect at the back of his head just to the right of center.  Indeed, Escort Motorcycle Officer Bobby Hargis, who was riding to the left-rear, was hit so hard by the blown-out brains and debris that he though he himself had been shot.  Jackie told the Warren Commission that, from the front, he looked just fine, but that she had had a hard time holding his skull and brains together at the back of his head.  

The question thus becomes how a massive blow-out of brains and gore to the left-rear could be shown bulging out to the right-front in the film.

Recent research by another physicist, David W. Mantik, who is also an M.D. and board-certified in radiation oncology, has demonstrated that the JFK autopsy X-rays have been altered to conceal the blow-out to the back of the head. The alteration of the film and the alteration of the X-rays thus constitute mutually reinforcing deceptions complemented by the publication of frame 313 in LIFE magazine with a caption saying that the bullet had entered the back of his head and blown out the right-front—a caption that was rewritten twice after breaking the plates, an event unique in the history of American journalism—and the televised appearance by Abraham Zapruder the very evening of the assassination, during which he placed his hand to his right forehead to described a blow-out to the right-front, which did not occur. By dismissing the medical evidence as corrupt and endorsing the authenticity of the film, Chambers violated the requirement of total evidence, which insists that reasoning in science must be based upon all the available relevant evidence.

No doubt, most of us would have a difficult time mastering the use of the technique of optical densitometry, which Mantik borrowed from physics and applied to the X-rays when he studied them at the National Archives.  Since David’s report of his research, which established that the X-rays are fabrications and that there was a second shot to the head, were published in Assassination Science (1998), which Chambers cites, I have a hard time understanding why he did not discuss it in this book. He does cite Mantik twice (on pages 188 and 192), but does so in relation to his article on the Zapruder film and not in relation to his work on the medical evidence.  Rather than addressing Mantik’s work on the Zapruder film directly, as would be typical for disagreements between physicists, Chambers instead simply accepts the verdict of an historian on the work of a physicist—which may be another unique event.  He claims the medical evidence forms an “unstable data set”, which was true before Mantik sorted out the authentic from the inauthentic, as he has done in a brilliant synthesis that was published in Murder in Dealey Plaza (2000).  Indeed, there are no indications here that Chambers is familiar with the most important objective and scientific studies of the medical evidence or of the fabrication of the film, especially in The Great Zapruder Film Hoax (2003) and in Horne’s multiple volumes.

The study of the assassination has drawn the attention of physicists at least since David S. Lifton’s Best Evidence (1980).  As Lifton explains, he showed photos of Zapruder frames to Richard Feynman at CalTech in 1965, where the Nobel Prize laureate pointed out that there is forward movement from frames 312 to 313, which, when the back-and-to-the-left motion observed in the film is taken as proof of a shot from in front, implies that JFK was hit at least twice in the head—once from behind and once from in front—a double-hit that was meticulously diagrammed in Josiah Thompson’s Six Seconds in Dallas (1967). Chambers dismisses JFK’s forward movement as an effect of William Greer, the driver, slowing the vehicle.  More than 60 witnesses have reported that Greer slowed the vehicle dramatically or actually brought it to a halt, which is not seen in the film, but only he moves slightly forward at that point in time. The vehicle is shown as accelerating immediately thereafter, making it anomalous that the occupants’ bodies—Governor and Nellie Connally and the Secret Service agents—are thrown forward following frame 313.

Since we know that, if the shot was fired from the right-front, then his brains should have been blown-out to the left-rear and not to the right-front, which is what we observe in the film, the conclusion that the film has been faked clearly follows.  

Chambers cites work by Wrone and Zavada that has been refuted in books with which he should be familiar, but does not report that proof of something wrong with the film is present in the film itself.  It occurred to me that those who were falsifying the film might have paid so much time and attention to the head shot and its effects—as we see them now in frames 313-316—that they might have overlooked the head wound in later frames.  And, indeed, I found that it is visible in frame 374, among others, where its cashew-nut-like shape corresponds very closely to “Area P” (for “patched”) in Mantik’s analysis of the lateral cranial X-ray, as I have explained and demonstrated in “Dealey Plaza Revisited: What Happened to JFK?”

Perhaps if he had read more of Assassination Science (1998), which he cites, Chambers might have learned that Robert B. Livingston, M.D.—a world authority on the human brain and also an expert on wound ballistics, having supervised an emergency medical hospital for injured Okinawans and for Japanese prisoners of war during the Battle of Okinawa—had concluded that the diagrams and photographs of the brain stored at the National Archives cannot be authentic photographs and diagrams of the brain of John F. Kennedy.  He compared the multiple reports from experienced physicians at Parkland Hospital of cerebellar as well as cerebral tissue extruding from the blow-out at the back of the head with the photographs and diagrams at the National Archives—the brain itself is mysteriously missing—which show a wholly intact cerebellum.  Since Chambers does not know the medical evidence any better than he knows the photographic, he precluded drawing inferences about those who were involved in the cover-up and the crime itself.

The Mafia, for example, could not have extended its reach into Bethesda Naval Hospital to falsify X-rays that were under the control of medical officers of the US Navy, agents of the Secret Service, or the president’s personal physician. Neither pro- nor anti-Castro Cubans could have substituted another brain for that of JFK.  And the KGB, which may have had an ability to fabricate films comparable to that of the CIA and of Hollywood, would have had no opportunity to gain access to the original Zapruder film.  Once we know the breadth and depth of the cover-up, which was implemented in great detail to effect mutually-reinforcing forms of deception, we begin to appreciate that those who had the motive, the means and the opportunity to bring them about were at the highest levels of our own government, as James Douglass, JFK and the Unspeakable (2008), explains.

It not only troubles me profoundly that Chambers violates a basic principle of scientific reasoning and that evidence internal to the extant film refutes his presumption that the film is authentic but that Jefferson Morley endorses the book with the following claim:  “He dismantles the bad science at the core of Vincent Bugliosi’s flabby Reclaiming History [2007] and politely punts the fantasy that the Zapruder film was altered.” While I agree that Bugliosi’s work is indefensible, to the best of my knowledge, Morley has never studied the film and is not in a position to know whether it is authentic or not.  This is not the first time Morley has proven to be unequal to the demands of serious research about the assassination of one of the Kennedys.  Science, as we have seen, can enable us to sort out authentic from inauthentic evidence, but we have to think things through and not let ourselves be misled by pseudo-science masquerading as genuine in the search for truth.

* Thanks to David W. Mantik, John Costella, and Morgan Reynolds for their feedback.

Jim Fetzer, 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.

####

Read More

GORDON DUFF: WHEN WILL THE CRIMES OF 9/11 END?

GORDON DUFF: WHEN WILL THE CRIMES OF 9/11 END?

October 16, 2010 posted by Gordon Duff 

DISINFORMATION, SPYING, INTIMIDATION, THE BIGGEST COVER-UP IN AMERICAN HISTORY

By Gordon Duff STAFF WRITER/Senior Editor

9 years after 9/11, American drug production in Afghanistan has gone from zero to 92% of world output.  Calling the drug business there anything but “American” is a lie.  We don’t just “turn way,” we are in it up to our necks, maybe deeper.  Last week we learned that USAID, part of the Department of State, was supplying fertilizer for opium production.  Testimony that implicates every level of the American government in drug dealing, corruption and even complicity in terrorism has been ignored or suppressed for years.  The American government, in concert with the powerful Israel lobby, is working to silence citizen dissent, suppress “open source” information and control, not just the media but every form of human communication beyond the guarded whisper.

No police state in history is guilty of more.

In particular, I recently read the most recent additions to Dimitri  Khalezov’s book on 9/11.  Khalezov was a Russian “special weapons” officer.  This led his examination to look at applications of advanced technologies tied to the application of particle physics, fission and fusion weapons and “Star Wars” technology which he has a unique understanding of.  What was enjoyable was his non-dogmatic approach.  There are so many theories around regarding 9/11, with government paid “shills” coming up with a new and crazier version almost weekly.  For every pronouncement about Al Qaeda and hijackers the government makes overtly, they make ten pronouncements about space aliens and cosmic death rays on the internet.

We know they do it, they have been caught repeatedly.  These are the actions of a police state.

I am not ready to comprehensively discuss all the reasons that 9/11 is such a disgusting subject.  Suffice it to say that the naked lies the government has foisted on the public for so long are both irrational and patently insane.  This is where Khalezov shines.  He has a way of cutting through the manure.

It is funny to read a Russian discuss 9/11.  One area that we can deal with today and, perhaps, put one minor thing to rest is how the World Trade Center was built and why an aircraft, why 500 aircraft could never hurt it.  Oh, you say, the plane flew right through the building, passing through the thin glass windows and out the other side.

Yup, that’s how it seemed.

How Khalezov describes the outer walls of the WTC is though comparison with a World War II T-34 Russian Tank.  His point is that each of the beams that made up the outside of the building, spaced 3 feet apart, had four sides, each not only harder but thicker than the armor on a tank.  The analogies used by Khalezov were compelling.

His first point, of course, is that anti-tank rounds are never made of aluminum.  You don’t use aluminum knives. 

 Aluminum can’t cut steel.

We could go further:  Crashing a Boeing 767 into 20 massive 4 sided hardened steel girders, highly supported and interlaced, cutting through them and eventually bringing down the largest building in the world would be the equivalent of throwing a beer can at a garbage truck.

Want more?  Cutting a steel knife with a piece of cheese?

Derailing a freight train with a thrown marshmallow?  OK, that one is a bit much, but you get the picture.  Aircraft are made of lightweight and very thin aluminum.  The WTC had a massive outer wall of heavy steel, thick enough to armor a tank, a similar center structure around the core and a second wall for a plane to pass through.  No possible amount of aluminum in any shape or configuration at 400 miles per hour or 2000 miles per hour could pass through one steel beam much less dozens.

Pages are spent describing this point nobody has discussed other than Khalezov.  It is clear that Khalezov and David Ray Griffin don’t see “eye to eye” on the methods used to bring the building down.  In many ways, it is a shame that there is a more powerful need to deal with the science before we deal with the criminal intent, especially finding those responsible.  I respect both men for the work they have done and their disagreement is an honest one.  That both manage to disagree with each other and still humiliate the government’s fabrication is both curious and compelling.

On this point all are in agreement.  Khalezov is emphatic that the wildest possible conspiracy theory involves box cutters, hijackers and  a massive building “pancaking” to the ground in total free fall while enough steel to build a naval fleet turns into dust. No idiot could believe that, a “hare brained” lie that has proven to be assembled from planted witnesses, misquotes and total fabrications.

If even one of these things were a factor, it would be evidence of a criminal conspiracy.  That all are present, that and the massive government spy operation directed against those seeking the truth, an operation that takes up an entire department header by Cass Sonnenstein, with a title that unavoidably sounds like “Reichs Minister of Propaganda,” we can say “case closed.”  We can also say with some certainty, “No Muslims were harmed in the making of this picture.”

I don’t plan on going there but something haunts me.  Nobody has seen or heard from Osama bin Laden since 2001.  Benazir Bhutto says he was killed then.  Intelligence officials from several countries confirm this privately.  Yet we have a hundred thousand people looking for him, nearly 5,000 have died hunting him after his death was confirmed, as reliable sources tell us.

On the other hand, the “suicide hijackers” we claim were on the planes on 9/11 seem to be, not only alive, but are thinking of suing the networks for being refused entry into the country to go on talk shows.  How can we have dead hijackers kept out of the country because they are on terrorist watch lists?  Doesn’t that stop when you die?

What kind of place are we running here?

But, we are here to talk dissolving steel, magically plummeting buildings and government misconduct.  When the NIST stated that the WTC “pancaked” they misrepresented the amount of concrete in the upper stories.  There was nothing to collapse, only vertical steel, no huge concrete walls, no pillars made of concrete and only thin concrete floors.  They lied.

Almost all the concrete in the buildings is in the foundation, there is little in the upper floors.  They are steel.  It would be like dissolving several aircraft carriers and seeing them blow away with the wind, except this is exactly what we saw.  However, we have seen one other steel building, the Windsor Building, in Madrid, burn for 24 hours.  This building was nowhere as strong and burned, not one hour but for at least a day.

The “government’ runs a website at www.america.gov meant to “debunk” 9/11.  They refer to an article from Popular Science and a study done by the National Institute of Standards.  Few scientists will stand by any of this anymore, they are all either onboard with “9/11 Truth” or protecting their careers with silence.

When we talk about steel no plane could ever penetrate, the NIST does supply a nice photo, though.

My recommendation is to read the book, not because I agree with it or everything it says.  Simply read it because it provides many relevant points, and some clear warnings about how serious government interference has been in the process of finding the truth.

Every lie, every infiltrated group, every bit of ridiculous pseudo-science proves one thing.  

9/11 was an inside job and those responsible are still pulling the strings in America.
--------------------------------
About Gordon Duff: Gordon Duff is a Marine Vietnam veteran, and Senior Editor at Veterans Today. His career has included extensive experience in international banking along with such diverse areas as consulting on counter insurgency, defense technologies or acting as diplomatic officer of UN humanitarian groups. Gordon Duff's articles are published around the world and translated into a number of languages. He is regularly on TV and radio, a popular and sometimes controversial guest.

####

Read More