The Peculiar Similarities between 9-11 and the Assassination of RFK
Sen. Robert F. Kennedy at the Ambassador Hotel shortly before he was ushered into the pantry where he was shot.
The Zionist-controlled media pretends that the truth about the murder of Robert F. Kennedy is “out of our reach.” Why would they maintain this absurd position?
“The truth appears to be out of our reach.”
– Tony Dokoupil, “Who Killed RFK?” CBS News, May 28, 2018
“In the three years since 9-11, we’ve begun to understand that it’s possible to know what happened without knowing what happened.”
– “The Public Knowledge of 9-11”, New York Times, September 11, 2004
The murder of Sen. Robert F. Kennedy (RFK), the leading presidential candidate when he was shot in Los Angeles on June 5, 1968, profoundly changed American history. The RFK murder case, in which a Palestinian immigrant was blamed, has several similarities with the assassination of the senator’s brother, President John F. Kennedy in 1963, and the terrorist attacks of 9-11 three decades later. If we examine the peculiar characteristics these crimes have in common, what will it reveal about the culprits? If we find a high degree of commonality linking these political atrocities is it possible to deduce something about the nature of the criminal network behind them? Are we dealing with different criminal networks, or one? Is it domestic or foreign?
These three crimes are similar in several ways. On the general level each crime was in effect a coup that radically changed American political history through violence. The murder of John F. Kennedy abruptly ended a progressive and popular presidency; the assassination of Sen. Robert F. Kennedy prevented JFK’s reform-minded crime-fighting brother from becoming president; and the terror attacks of 9-11 ushered in a radical policy coup and a new era focused on waging the fraudulent War on Terror, an Israeli stratagem to rule the Middle East.
Another shared characteristic is that these crimes were all false-flag deceptions in which a fall guy was scapegoated to conceal a more elaborate crime. Lee Harvey Oswald, Sirhan Bishara Sirhan, and Osama bin Laden are the “lone gunmen” blamed for the crimes in the official narratives. In spite of ample evidence clearly disproving the official stories, to this day the mainstream media promotes the false narratives.
In all three cases official investigations were set up to support the false narrative. The agencies involved in the investigations participated in the confiscation and destruction of evidence that challenged their story. Likewise, in each case the controlled media failed to conduct its own investigation and ignored irrefutable evidence that disproves the official story. The media cover-ups have gone on for decades in spite of well-documented evidence, such as the autopsy report of Sen. Robert F. Kennedy which clearly proves he was killed by a second shooter behind him. How is it that decades go by without the truth coming out in the media; without the evidence being discussed? Who has the power to exercise such control over the media?
The autopsy of Robert Kennedy clearly shows that the fatal shot was fired from directly behind the senator, while Sirhan Sirhan was several feet in front of him.
This means the false narratives are being protected to allow the secret cabal behind these crimes to avoid being exposed and prosecuted. This has been going on for more than fifty years, which means the criminal terrorist network responsible for all three atrocities remains in power and is able to carry out similar crimes whenever it wants – and it does. The cabal behind the murders of the Kennedys and 9-11 is still in power at the highest levels of our government and media. This is why it is extremely important that the criminal network responsible for these heinous crimes be identified.
“SIRHAN DID NOT KILL MY FATHER.”
The fact that Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. has spoken out and is calling for an investigation into the assassination of his father fifty years ago is commendable. His doubts about who really murdered his father were published in a Washington Post article on May 26, entitled “Who killed Bobby Kennedy? His son RFK Jr. doesn’t believe it was Sirhan Sirhan.”
“There were too many bullets,” Kennedy Jr. said. “You can’t fire 13 shots out of an eight-shot gun.” Furthermore, as the article reported, “Kennedy was shot at point-blank range from behind, including a fatal shot behind his ear. But Sirhan, a 24-year-old Palestinian immigrant, was standing in front of him. Was there a second gunman? The debate rages to this day.”
It should be clear that we are not really talking about a raging debate, but rather a media and government cover-up of well-documented facts. Los Angeles Coroner Thomas Noguchi conducted the official autopsy on the body of Robert Kennedy on the morning of June 6, 1968, and found that the shot that killed RFK “had entered through the mastoid bone, an inch behind the right ear and had traveled upward to sever the branches of the superior cerebral artery.”
Noguchi wrote about the murder in a book entitled Coroner (1983), in which he said, “Until more is precisely known…the existence of a second gunman remains a possibility. Thus, I have never said that Sirhan Sirhan killed Robert Kennedy.”
Paul Schrade, a member of the Kennedy entourage, has been trying since 1974 to persuade authorities to reinvestigate the case and identify the second gunman. Robert Kennedy, Jr. has joined forces with Schrade in calling for a new investigation. “The fact that Robert Kennedy Jr. would say, ‘Sirhan did not kill my father,'” Schrade told the Boston Globe, “I think that’s very effective.”
“Yes, he did shoot me. Yes, he shot four other people and aimed at Kennedy,” Schrade said about Sirhan. “The important thing is he did not shoot Robert Kennedy. Why didn’t they go after the second gunman? They knew about him right away. They didn’t want to know who it was. They wanted a quickie.”
In a statement to the author of “Who Killed Bobby? The Unsolved Murder of Robert F. Kennedy,” before Sirhan’s parole hearing in 2016, Schrade said:
The LAPD and LA DA knew two hours after the fatal shooting of Robert Kennedy that he was shot by a second gunman and they had conclusive evidence that Sirhan Bishara Sirhan could not and did not do it. The official record shows that [the prosecution at Sirhan’s trial] never had one witness – and had no physical nor ballistic evidence – to prove Sirhan shot Robert Kennedy.
Evidence locked up for 20 years shows that the LAPD destroyed physical evidence and hid ballistic evidence exonerating Sirhan, and covered up conclusive evidence that a second gunman fatally wounded Robert Kennedy.
In calling for a new investigation into the murder of his father, Robert Kennedy, Jr. is like the relatives of the 9-11 victims who want a proper forensic investigation of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The fact that none of these cases were properly investigated from the beginning is the first shared characteristic; in all three cases there was flagrant tampering and outright destruction of evidence. Who is being protected by the failure to investigate the evidence from these crimes? Who has the power to control and corrupt such investigations?
Another peculiar similarity is that the Ambassador Hotel, where RFK was killed, and the World Trade Center were both owned by Zionist Jews who had very high-level connections to the state of Israel. In both cases the ownership of the building also appears to have played a key role in the crime. In the case of World Trade Center, having control of the property allowed the terrorists to prepare the buildings for the explosive demolitions that occurred on 9-11. Larry Silverstein, former national director of the United Jewish Appeal (UJA), a major funding operation for Israel, obtained control of the Twin Towers about five weeks before 9-11. For years prior to 9-11, Silverstein had regular weekly phone calls with Israel’s prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the godfather of the War on Terror, which began as a result of the false-flag terror attacks. What were Netanyahu and Silverstein talking about every Sunday afternoon?
The Ambassador Hotel was owned by J. Myer Schine who was connected to the Jewish Mob and the Henry Crown family.
The Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles was owned by Junius Myer Schine, father-in-law of Lester Crown, son of Henry Crown (born Krinsky), the largest shareholder of General Dynamics, a leading defense contractor. Henry Crown was a high-level Zionist agent who sent an aircraft manufacturing plant to Israel in the early 1950s in violation of U.S. law. The factory he sent to Israel illegally became the original Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI) plant. The Crown family is also connected to both Kennedy assassinations and the 9-11 cover-up. (See: “JFK and 9-11: Henry Crown and the Cover-Ups of Our Time”)
Under Myer Schine’s ownership the Ambassador Hotel hosted the gambling operations of Mickey Cohen, the West Coast lieutenant of Jewish mob boss Meyer Lansky. U.S. Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy had been involved in the prosecution of Cohen in which he was convicted for tax evasion and sent to Alcatraz in 1961. Who arranged for Kennedy to use the Ambassador Hotel?
The Ambassador Hotel had been Mickey Cohen’s base of operations in the late 1940’s when he became friends with the Jewish terrorist leader Menachem Begin who was hiding out in Los Angeles after a terrorist bombing in Palestine.
The Jewish gangster Mickey Cohen is not only connected to the Ambassador Hotel and the Santa Anita Racetrack, where Sirhan worked and gambled on the horses. Most notably, Cohen is also closely connected to Menachem Begin, former head of the terrorist gang, the Irgun, who was in position to take advantage of his relationship with Cohen to infiltrate his criminal network, which would include being able to set up Sirhan the Palestinian to be the Manchurian Candidate fall guy in the assassination of Bobby Kennedy. How neat.
The fact that the hotel was owned by Myer Schine, whose family was closely connected to Israeli intelligence, could explain how Sirhan, an armed stranger, was allowed to loiter in the hotel pantry for thirty minutes while Bobby Kennedy was speaking to a crowd in the adjacent room. Why would Sirhan linger in the pantry if his goal was simply to kill Kennedy? Why wouldn’t he pass through the corridor and approach the candidate on the podium from behind? Why wait in the pantry when there was no plan for Kennedy to come that way? Who was choreographing the movements of Sirhan – and Kennedy?
Who was the hidden hand guiding Robert Kennedy into the pantry where Sirhan was waiting?
As the author of “I Was There When Robert F. Kennedy Died” wrote:
Later, after events began to wind down, I remembered the strange incident where Frank Mankiewicz was insistent that Bobby leave through the kitchen, rather than the ballroom. I discreetly asked others who had campaigned with him for a long time if it made any sense that Bobby would leave through the kitchen rather than through his crowd of supporters and they all said RFK preferred to walk through a crowd after a speech. Neither at the time—nor for many years afterward—did I mention the incident that I witnessed, nor did I see any published accounts anywhere explaining why Bobby went through the kitchen.
Frank Mankiewicz, who had previously served as a West Coast director for the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith, worked with the Kennedy campaign. Why did Mankiewicz insist that Kennedy go through the pantry, where Sirhan was waiting with a loaded gun? What kind of hotel security would allow an armed stranger to loiter in the kitchen for a half-hour with a presidential candidate speaking in the next room?
The fact that the Ambassador Hotel and the World Trade Center were owned and controlled by individuals with high-level connections to Israel is very significant. This makes it possible to consider that Israeli agents could have taken advantage of these connections to carry out both false-flag operations. This would explain the use of an apparently mind-controlled Palestinian as the fall guy and the universal reluctance of the mainstream media to look beyond the official story. This would also explain the position of Zionist-controlled media outlets such as CBS News (controlled by Leslie Moonves, the great-nephew of David Ben Gurion, Israel’s founding father) and the New York Timesthat we will never know what happened. They want us to think that the truth is “out of our reach” because if the truth were known it would mean the end of the Zionist project.
Sources and recommended reading:
“JFK and 9-11: Henry Crown and the Cover-Ups of Our Time” Christopher Bollyn, November 7, 2013