Gingrich "Attacks" CNN's John King As "Despicable"

UK's liberal Guardian accuses Gingrich of "attacking" King????

To take an ex-wife and make it two days before the primary a significant question for a presidential campaign is as close to despicable as anything I can imagine.(APPLAUSE)
 I am frankly astounded that CNN would take trash like that and use it to open a presidential debate.
(APPLAUSE)
KING: As you noted, Mr Speaker, this story did not come from our network. As you also know, it is a subject of conversation on the campaign. I'm not – I get your point. I take your point.
GINGRICH: John, John, it was repeated by your network. You chose to start the debate with it. Don't try to blame somebody else. You and your staff chose to start this debate with it.
(APPLAUSE)

NewtsNews(4 hours ago)Marked as spam

ELECTION 2012 TRACKING GOP
Ballot updates daily
Election Primary and Caucus Results Update Periodically
----------- 1/11 ----- 1/12 --- 1/17 ---- 1/18 ---- 1/19 ---- Iowa --- New H --- S. Car
Ron P. -- 13% ---- 13% --- 12%^ --- 15%^ --- 16%^ ---- 22% ---- 23% ----- 19%^
Mitt R. --- 31%^ --- 34% --- 34%v -- 28%^ ---- 33%v --- 24% ---- 39% ----- 32%v
Newt G. - 16%v --- 14% --- 15% ---- 21% ---- 17%^ ---- 13% ----- 9% ----- 33%^Rick S. -- 16%v --- 15% --- 15% ---- 16% ---- 13%v -----24% ---- 9% ------ 9%
Removed from Virginia Primary: Newt G. - Rick S.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/19/politics/gop-debate/index.html?iref=obnetwork

Gingrich delivers show-stopper at beginning of South Carolina debate

By Rachel Streitfeld and Paul Steinhauser, CNN
An angry Gingrich chastised CNN for starting off with the question about his marriage

Newt Gingrich turned his contempt for the media into one of his strongest performances yet. When CNN Chief National Correspondent John King opened the debate with a question about open marriage, following an interview by Gingrich's ex-wife saying that he had sought one, the Republican chastised him."To take an ex-wife and make it two days before the primary a significant question in a presidential campaign is as close to despicable as anything I can imagine," Gingrich told King, the moderator of the debate.
Gingrich's response elicited loud applause from the audience

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71705.html
CNN’s John King puts himself on firing line

This is one of the most explosive moments we’ve seen in debate history,” CNN’s David Gergen said on the air afterward. “It was also one of the harshest attacks that we’ve had on the press that I can remember in a long, long time.”
King, who seemed defensive during Gingrich’s onslaught, took full responsibility for the question.
“This is one of those damned if you do, damned if you don’t,” he said during an interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper after the debate. “It was my judgment, my decision, and mine alone. If we’re going to deal with it, let’s deal with it upfront, let’s not try to sneak it into the middle of the debate somewhere.”
King elaborated on that decision later in a conversation with POLITICO. “My old AP training is, you deal with the lead of the day upfront first,” he said. “I respect anybody who disagrees, but we made our decision.”
“[Newt’s] criticism of the media is his right,” King continued. “He has the same First Amendment we do. It’s a tactic he’s used throughout the debate season.”
 Gingrich press secretary R.C. Hammond accused King of “gotcha journalism” but said he didn’t think it would hurt King’s reputation.
 former Reagan administration official Bud McFarlane, was equally critical. “I think Newt was hard on John King, but John King asked for it,” Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71705.html#ixzz1k1XSubkl


Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71705.html#ixzz1k1X8OMBI

Newsmax:Gingrich Slams CNN for Marriage Questions, Gets Standing Ovations
Newt Gingrich hit back forcefully at the opening of CNN's presidential debate at an allegation that he asked his second wife to tolerate an "open marriage," angrily denying the claim. "I think the disruptive, vicious, negative nature of the news media makes it harder to govern this country," Gingrich fumed at the debate moderator, John King of CNN. "I am appalled that you would begin a presidential debate on a topic like that." Gingrich's comments were greeted by multiple standing ovations from the audience.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/01/19/gingrich-slams-cnns-king-i-am-appalled-you-would-begin-presidential-d

Gingrich Slams CNN's King: 'I Am Appalled That You Would Begin a Presidential Debate With a Topic Like That'

By Noel Sheppard | January 19, 2012 | 20:52

       

CNN’s John King despicably started Thursday’s Republican presidential debate in South Carolina by bringing up allegations made by Newt Gingrich’s ex-wife earlier in the day.
When asked to respond to the controversy, the former Speaker of the House said, “I am appalled that you would begin a presidential debate with a topic like that,” (video follows with transcribed highlights and commentary):

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

To the amazement of those in the audience as well as viewers at home, King addressed this issue right out of the gate.
“As you know," said the moderator to the former Speaker, "your ex-wife gave an interview to ABC News and another interview with the Washington Post and this story has now gone viral on the Internet. In it, she says you came to her in 1999 at a time when you were having an affair. She says you asked her, Sir, to enter into an open marriage. Would you like to take some time to respond to that?”
“No,” answered Gingrich, “but I will.”

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/01/19/gingrich-slams-cnns-king-i-am-appalled-you-would-begin-presidential-d#ixzz1jyOdZcGv
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/

Gingrich Tears a Strip Off of John King & CNN

However you feel about Newt Gingrich, his response to CNN's John King, at the start of tonight's U.S. Presidential debate was sublime:

h/t Fred

Newt Gingrich SLAMS CNN For Question About His Ex-Wife! SC Republican Presidential Debate pt.1

Newt Gingrich and John King marriage exchange – the full transcript ‎ You +1'd this publicly. Undo The Guardian - 1 hour ago JOHN KING: And just as speaker Gingrich surged into contention here in South Carolina, a direct fresh character attack on the Speaker. ... JOHN KING: And just as speaker Gingrich surged into contention here in South Carolina, a direct fresh character attack on the Speaker. And Mr Speaker, I want to start with that this evening. As you know, your ex-wife gave an interview to ABC News and another interview with The Washington Post. And this story has now gone viral on the internet. In it, she says that you came to her in 1999, at a time when you were having an affair. She says you asked her, sir, to enter into an open marriage. Would you like to take some time to respond to that? GINGRICH: No, but I will. (APPLAUSE) GINGRICH: I think the destructive, vicious, negative nature of much of the news media makes it harder to govern this country, harder to attract decent people to run for public office. And I am appalled that you would begin a presidential debate on a topic like that. (APPLAUSE) KING: Is that all you want to say, sir? GINGRICH: Let me finish. KING: Please. GINGRICH: Every person in here knows personal pain. Every person in here has had someone close to them go through painful things. To take an ex-wife and make it two days before the primary a significant question for a presidential campaign is as close to despicable as anything I can imagine. (APPLAUSE) My – my two daughters – my two daughters wrote the head of ABC and made the point that it was wrong, that they should pull it, and I am frankly astounded that CNN would take trash like that and use it to open a presidential debate. (APPLAUSE) KING: As you noted, Mr Speaker, this story did not come from our network. As you also know, it is a subject of conversation on the campaign. I'm not – I get your point. I take your point. GINGRICH: John, John, it was repeated by your network. You chose to start the debate with it. Don't try to blame somebody else. You and your staff chose to start this debate with it. (APPLAUSE) Let me be quite clear. Let me be quite clear. The story is false. Every personal friend I have who knew us in that period said the story was false. We offered several of them to ABC to prove it was false. They weren't interested because they would like to attack any Republican. They're attacking the governor. They're attacking me. I'm sure they'll presently get around to Senator Santorum and Congressman Paul. I am tired of the elite media protecting Barack Obama by attacking Republicans. (APPLAUSE) Local: Gingrich Slams CNN for Asking About Ex-Wife‎ WLTX.com In-Depth: Gingrich Knocks Media for 'Open Marriage' Question‎ BloombergTelegraph.co.uk- Daily Caller all 1512 news articles »

The Guardian

Newt Gingrich slams John King for question on ex-wife (2:01) You +1'd this publicly. Undo Washington Post - 11 minutes ago Presidential candidate Newt Gingrich slammed John King for opening the Republican presidential debate with a question concerning his ex-wife. (Jan. ...

Pam Geller endorses Newt Gingrich

Gingrich Wins The GOP Debate In The First Five Minutes

First question from the enemedia's CNN, craven news network:

The country needs a fighter. There is a war on the American people, we are under attack from within, and the Republican establishment have been meek, kowed, defeated. Gingrich is fierce. We need a fighter to go toe to toe against the silver tongued snake in the White House.

Posted by Pamela Geller on Thursday, January 19, 2012 at 09:41 PM in WHITE HOUSE 2012 |

Thursday, January 19, 2012

Big Day in the GOP Race

Perry pulled out (it is with great joy that I note that my exposing Perry's Islamic curriculum and close ties to Grover Norquist helped to cut the Perry campaign off at the pass this past summer).

Santorum actually won Iowa (enemedia and GOP establishment feed distrust among Conservative voters).

Tne enemedia is Caining Newt.

I stand behind my endorsement for Newt. Atlas readers, get out the vote for Newt. He is right on the Muslim Brotherhood. He is right on sharia. He is right on the Fakestinian people.

Do not make perfect the enemy of the good.

UPDATE: At least he asked her ........  

Here is Aga Khan/Rick Perry Curriculum: Scrubbed from Web, Cache Scrubbed from Google Search

"The religion that the Prophet Muhammad preached provided his followers an ethical and moral vision for leading a life of righteousness." Perry/Khan curriculum.

In one of my first posts on the controversial Aga Khan/Perry school curriculum on Islam for Texas public schools, I published the links (URLs) to the Muslim Histories and Cultures Program (MHC). The MHC page said proudly: "In April 2004, the Aga Khan Foundation (AKF) and UT-Austin finalized a grant proposal that created the partnership that became known as the Muslim Histories and Cultures Program (MHC).... Governor Perry was instrumental in getting this program off the ground."
Soon after I posted about it, the links went dead. It was curious that the multiple pages of all nine lessons plus adjunct powerpoints and lesson plans were all taken offline. Subsequently, I found the Google cached pages and posted those links of the curriculum material. Now those links have also been removed. The cache is gone. Why are they hiding this?
Before everything disappears, I am posting the text and the screenshots of all nine lessons of this proselytizing whitewash of Islam. We are handicapping our children by whitewashing the jihadic doctrine and the threat it presents to the West. This is the actual curriculum, not any one single teacher's lesson plan (which is what other misinformed blogs are using, claiming it is the actual official curriculum, in an attempt to exonerate Perry of this dastardly action).
Further, why is this even being taught in the public schools? There is no intense, extensive Jewish curriculum or Hindu curriculum or Christian curriculum. Further, these religions are not slaughtering Americans and non-believers in the hundreds of thousands, so why color it pretty?
Rick Perry's partner in this Islamic education program is the Aga Khan. The Aga Khan Development Network signed three agreements with the Syrian Government, and “between 2003 and 2008,” the Aga Khan’s group “spent $40 million to develop business in Syria.” Syria has been listed by the State Department as among the State Sponsors of Terrorism since December 29, 1979, and for years has allowed the jihad terror groups Hamas and Hezbollah to operate with impunity out of Damascus.
Another Aga Khan organization, the Aga Khan Fund for Economic Development, is one of the owners of the Bank al-Habib in Pakistan. In 2007, Daniel Pearl’s widow Mariane sued that bank, charging that it had funded al-Qaeda and was involved in killing Daniel Pearl. Those charges have never been answered.
SPIEGEL Interview with Aga Khan: Spiegel: So, what are the root causes of terrorism?

Aga Khan: Unsolved political conflicts, frustration and, above all, ignorance. Nothing that was born out of a theological conflict.
[...]
SPIEGEL: That means the West should deal with the radical Islamist Hamas as well?
Aga Khan: You have to work with whoever the population has elected as long as they are willing to respect what I call cosmopolitan ethics.

Aga Khan Senior: How the Eton-educated wartime Aga Khan offered '30,000 armed Arabs' to help Hitler - but still evaded treason trial

JihadWatch on Perry connections to Grover Norquist

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/01/norquist-protege-rick-perry-dropping-out-of-presidential-race.html
Grover Norquist may be more responsible than anyone else for Muslim Brotherhood access to the highest levels of power in the U.S. While it is hard for any Republican candidate to avoid Norquist altogether, so all-pervasive is his influence and power, Norquist is clearly much closer to Perry than to other candidates. Perry and Grover Norquist held a joint press conference in March 2011. Perry appeared at a fundraiser for Norquist's Americans for Tax Reform group. More: Norquist actively campaigned for Perry back in 2009. More still: Perry was investigated by the Texas Ethics Commission in 2004 for allegations that he illegally used campaign money to finance a trip to the Bahamas. In the course of this investigation, it came to light that along on the Bahamas trip at his own expense was Grover Norquist. Perry and Norquist are clearly not just casual acquaintances. Which other candidates have fundraised for Norquist? Which have vacationed with him?
Then there was the whole business of the Perry/Aga Khan curriculum on Islam for Texas schools, a complete whitewash of Islam and jihad that was initiated and officially sanctioned by Perry himself. The Perry campaign obviously realized how damaging the curriculum could have been to their man's chances, and so deleted it not only from the web, but also from the Google cache

Sirhan: I Hated Israel, Shot The Gun, But Not RFK

There's a big campaign out there to convince America that a Palestinean Arab did NOT kill Robert F. Kennedy for revenge against Israel. It's the same people who want you to believe Arabs did not hijack planes on 9/11, and the same people who want you to believe Israel's Mossad killed JFK.

Now how hard is it to guess what interest group might be behind such a massive campaign to defend Arab victims and attack Jewish / Israeli villians who persecute Palestineans? Why, True Patriots, of course. Ask Ron Paul. According to this "truthful" account, Sirhan admits he still hates Israel, he still loves Arab Palestine, he did shoot the gun, but he DID NOT SHOOT JFK. Right. And it was impossible for a 757 to hit the Pentagon. And death rays downed WTC not hijackers. Sound familiar?

Here it is unedited. Remember, conspiracy theorists tell the OPPOSITE of the truth, and remember my guide to Good and Evil 101. People who bless the Jews are generally good. People who want to destroy the Jews are generally bad. Not hard to tell what side this guy is on.



I didn't know where I was and I don't know how I got there. I was in a state of blackout."

Reynolds: "You were a Manchurian candidate....It's something the CIA uses. They assassinate a president, or senator, or anyone they wish, and make it look like some crazed, lone-nut assassin did it. But he has been heavily drugged, possibly with LSD, and undergone intense brainwashing followed by reprogramming. Everything you're saying about yourself follows the established pattern of the drugged, duped, CIA patsy."

Sirhan: "They used me, framed me, and they set me up to die."


And if you believe that, I have a Ture Patriot presidential candidate you should vote for...


http://uprootedpalestinians.blogspot.com/2010/06/sirhan-sirhan-in-his-own-words.html

Saturday, June 26, 2010

Sirhan Sirhan: In His Own Words

by Stephen Lendman

Shortly after midnight on June 5, 1968, Robert Kennedy was shot, The New York Times headlining:

"Kennedy is Dead, Victim of Assassin; Suspect, Arab Immigrant, Arraigned; Johnson Appoints Panel on Violence"


Sirhan Sirhan was the alleged assassin, convicted, and serving a life sentence at (no pun intended) Pleasant Valley State Prison, CA, despite convincing evidence of his innocence.

In his October 17, 2008 article "The Assassinations of the 1960s as 'Deep Events,' " Peter Dale Scott discussed the killings of both Kennedy brothers and Martin Luther King, saying:

"The more that I look at these deep events comparatively, ranging over the past five decades, the more similarities I see between them, and the more I understand them in the light of each other."

With respect to both Kennedys and King, official accounts obscured the events, suppressed key facts, enough to question the guilt of the alleged suspects, concealing the real culprits and why men of this stature were assassinated - what Scott called "some continuing and hostile force within our society..."

In his June 13, 2010 article titled, "JFK and RFK: The Plots that Killed Them, The Patsies that Didn't," James Fetzer debunked the official accounts, saying:

"we are looking at staged events that fit into a recurrent pattern in US and world history where innocent individuals (or 'patsies') are baited and framed for cover-up purposes," RFK's killing "in part intended to prevent a reinvestigation into his brother's death....The assassinations of RFK and JFK were both conspiracies. Both involved the destruction of evidence. Both involved the fabrication of evidence. Both involved framing their patsies. Both involved complicity by local officials. Both involved planning by the CIA. Both were used to deny the American people (their) right to be governed by leaders of their own choosing." Both put a myth to the rule of law, judicial fairness, and democratic freedoms.

Both crimes and MLK's assassination eliminated figures dark American forces wanted silenced, blaming innocent "patsies" for the killings, Sirhan Sirhan for RFK's. Fetzer's article explains numerous important facts:

-- multiple shots targeted him, more "than could have come from Sirhan Sirhan's gun" that was also the wrong caliber;

-- "RFK was shot behind the right ear from about 1.5 inches, but Sirhan was never that close and always in front of him;"

-- the coroner and LAPD reports were contradictory;

-- LAPD "engaged in massive destruction of evidence from the pantry of the hotel because 'it would not fit into a card file,' " as part of an official cover-up to blame Sirhan for a state-sponsored assassination, evidence suggesting CIA involvement in both Kennedy brothers and MLK killings;

-- Sirhan's gun was a ".22 caliber, eight-round revolver (serial number H-53725);"

-- he "emptied his weapon from a location in front of Bobby Kennedy;"

-- Dr. Thomas Hoguchi's autopsy "showed RFK was hit by four bullets, all of which were fired from behind at upward angles;

-- five others were wounded by separate shots;"

-- as many as 13 shots were fired;

-- Dr. Noguchi's autopsy "did not point to Sirhan as the killer;"

-- an eyewitness, DeWayne Wofler, "testified that the bullets fired at RFK had come from an entirely different gun," not Sirhan's;

-- a security guard, Eugene Cesar, standing right behind RFK, had a drawn gun of the same caliber as the murder weapon; it was never examined nor was he charged; and

-- "a woman in a polka dot dress" left the scene hurriedly, "shouting, "We shot him! We shot him! We shot Kennedy!"

In their book, "The Assassination of Robert F. Kennedy," Jonn Christian and William Turner made a convincing case "indicting Cesar for the crime," concluding "that Sirhan may have been firing blanks."

Fetzer's article has detailed information on both JFK and RFK assassinations, accessed through the following link:

http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2010/06/jfk-and-rfk-plots-that-killed-them.html

Below, Sirhan gives his own account of what happened that night and why he was at the Ambassador Hotel.

"My Morning with Sirhan"

On January 21, 2010, Academic Prison Teacher, Gerald B. Reynolds, spent time with Sirhan and wrote it up in detail. An account below follows.

At the Delta Facility library, a prison guard let him in. His ID said Sirhan Sirhan. "He looked at me in a calm way with a half-smile. I looked at him....There was an eerie, prolonged silence." He's now 66 years old, 42 of them in prison for a crime he didn't commit.

After another "calm silence....I swiveled in my chair to face Sirhan Sirhan and asked, 'Did you do it?' "

"Did I do what," he responded.

Reynolds: "You know."

Sirhan: "What do you want to know?"

Reynolds: "Did you kill Robert F. Kennedy?"

Sirhan: "No, I did NOT kill Robert F. Kennedy!"

Reynolds: "I know you didn't."

Sirhan: "How do you know?"

Reynolds explained that he studied the details of his case, learned that RFK was killed at point blank range by a bullet to the back of his head.

"The real assassin appears to be Kennedy's 26 year old Ace Security Company bodyguard....Thane Eugene Cesar. At least one eye witness claims to have seen Cesar with a smoking gun in his hand immediately after Kennedy fell to the floor. An audio recording made during the assassination indicates that there were at least 11 shots fired (perhaps more) from possibly three different guns."

"The conclusion is that Kennedy was shot three times from behind with a fourth bullet passing through his suit coat. The fact that you (Sirhan) were standing in front of Kennedy is undisputed and yet according to the coroner's report not one bullet entered Robert F. Kennedy from the front of his body."

Sirhan: "Oh my! I knew this morning when I woke up that God was telling me he had something great in store for me today and this is it! God has sent you to me!....I was beginning to lose hope so you were sent to lift my spirits. Now I can be hopeful again. Thank goodness somebody else knows."

Reynolds: "Have you ever talked to anybody else in prison that knows the truth of your case?"

Sirhan: "Yes. One person, that's all....He was one who drives a truck around and empties the dumpsters....I had a job where I had to take the garbage out of the kitchen....to the dumpster....once in a while he would talk to me. He told me he believed I was innocent."

Reynolds: "Did you talk to this guy often?"

Sirhan: "Actually no. He and I only talked maybe about three times and each time it was only for about five minutes or so."

He explained that he never met anyone in prison, besides him, who knows. He said friends on the outside set up a web site for him - rfkmustdie.com, with information about him, RFK, and whether CIA operatives killed him, framing Sirhan for the crime.

Reynolds: "Do you have an appeal on file right now?"

Sirhan: "Not now. Everything has run its course. I had a great attorney named Lawrence Teeter....He was a wonderful man and a great attorney. He tried several times to win me an appeal and even just to get a new evidentiary hearing but the courts seemed biased against me. The judges wouldn't budge....Teeter died in 2005, and I haven't really tried to work on any appeal since then."

Yet he feels, one day, he can be cleared and set free. "The truth will win out," he believes. Earlier he was on San Quentin's death row for three years. "They thought they were rid of me but then something happened they didn't plan on."

Led by Chief Justice Rose Bird, "the California Supreme Court intervened and ruled that the death penalty was unconstitutional. The ruling was retroactive and my sentence was commuted to life in prison. They thought I was dead and yet after 41 and a half years I'm still alive!" Now it's over 42.

But "they stole my life!....I've been rotting in that stinking prison for (over four decades) for nothing!....The bastards stole my life....I have been denied parole 13 times. I am scheduled for another parole hearing in 2011. (Against long odds), Maybe if there was a grassroots movement, like perhaps millions of people finding out how the authorities have buried me unjustly, and coming together in demonstrations all over the country they would have to reconsider and let me go."

Saying to Reynolds, "You do it for me. Become a guest speaker at colleges and universities and speak on my behalf....I hereby give you my permission....I will notify the press of your name and mission."

Reynolds: "Ah, no, not my name. My name can't be attached to this. I could get in big trouble. You know the monsters that run this place."

Sirhan: "OK, I understand. We will keep you anonymous."

Reynolds offered to make this conversation available to anyone "responsible enough to appreciate it." Sirhan suggested sending to magazines and newspapers. Reynolds said he'd try, sent it to one on the progressive left that wouldn't publish it, one reason for discussing it here.

Sirhan also explained he's Palestinian, born in Jerusalem in 1944, "alive during the turmoil that erupted when the United Nations stole our country and gave it to the Jews."

In fact, its 1947 Partition Plan (General Assembly Resolution 181) gave them 56% of historic Palestine, placing Jerusalem (declared a corpus separatum, a separate body) under UN trusteeship as an international city, binding to this day. At the time, Palestinians comprised two-thirds of the population, owning 93% of the land, most of it now stolen. All of it occupied illegally.

Ever since, Israelis treated "my people....like dogs. (They) shoot rockets and tank fire into the West Bank (and Gaza) killing everyone, including women and children. They drop bombs and spray machine gun fire into crowded marketplaces. They are treating my people the same way they were treated by the Nazis....It breaks my heart to see how my people are suffering."

Reynolds: "So, then, you're a Muslim?"

Sirhan: "No....I am a Christian. My whole family is Christian....We have been Christians for at least 800 years. We are Palestinian Christians."

He came to America at age 11, moved to Los Angeles, and settled in Pasadena, attending Altadena's Eliot Junior High School, graduating from John Muir High School, then completing two years of junior college..."

Reynolds asked if he had any connections to Middle East or organized terrorists?

Sirhan: "No. No way! I am alone. I am by myself. I do have a few people in the West Bank that I correspond with but they are just regular people. I have a brother in Los Angeles. But I definitely do not have any terrorist connections and I am not a member of any groups, any groups at all."

Spurious prison information circulated that on 9/11, he "gleefully clapped (his) hands and (was) delighted" to see the twin towers collapse, adding that he had confidential information of the impending attack "by a Middle Eastern terrorist organization whose members revere you as an icon and a hero and do everything they can to honor you."

Sirhan: "Oh my God, that's ridiculous. I've never had anything to do with any terrorist groups. Who said this about me?"

Reynolds: "It was Chief Deputy Warden James Mattingly."

Sirhan said he'll sue him for libel and slander, adding he wants to see his evidence. Reynolds asked what he thought of the incident, Sirhan explaining that he cried because his country was attacked and "felt sadness and anger and wanted to punish the people responsible...."

Reynolds: "Sirhan, what were the events that led up to you being in the pantry of the Ambassador Hotel on the night" JFK was shot there?

Sirhan: "In the evening, I had something to eat at Bob's Big Boy. Then later in the evening, I decided to drive downtown....The Jews were going to be having a big party to celebrate the one-year anniversary of Israel's" Six Day War victory."

Reynolds: "What did you intend to do once your got there?"

Sirhan: " I don't know exactly but I wanted to protest. The Jews should not have been allowed to fill the streets in celebration of stealing more of our land. I can remember driving down Highway 5 with my 22 caliber hand gun lying next to me on the passenger seat."

Reynolds: "Why did you have a gun with you in the car?"

Sirhan: "I had been shooting at the range earlier that day."

Reynolds: "Was the gun....out in the open?"

Sirhan: "No, it was in the plastic box it came in, you know, with the cloth, the cleaning rod, and oil."

Reynolds: "and what did you do when you got downtown?"

Sirhan: "I realized that I was a day early and that the event was to take place the next night. So I just drove back up the freeway."

Reynolds: "Why did you stop at the Ambassador Hotel?"

Sirhan: "I don't know. I can't remember parking and going in there but I must have because I was there."

Reynolds: "What did you do when you got there?"

Sirhan: "It was hot that night and I was very thirsty. I remember that....I went to the bar and had four drinks within about 15 minutes. I couldn't seem to get enough to drink....They were Tom Collins's....(but) I wasn't drunk. I felt drugged. I think somebody slipped something into my drinks. My legs and arms became rubbery. I remember standing by my car but I couldn't drive so I went back inside and got some coffee."

Reynolds: "How did you get downstairs to the pantry?"

Sirhan: "Somebody guided me. I don't know who."

Reynolds: "Did you have your gun with you?"

Sirhan: "Yes. When I was in the pantry, the gun was in my hand."

Reynolds: "Did you know Robert Kennedy was going to be walking toward you?"

Sirhan: "No. I didn't know where I was and I don't know how I got there. I was in a state of blackout."

Reynolds: "You were a Manchurian candidate....It's something the CIA uses. They assassinate a president, or senator, or anyone they wish, and make it look like some crazed, lone-nut assassin did it. But he has been heavily drugged, possibly with LSD, and undergone intense brainwashing followed by reprogramming. Everything you're saying about yourself follows the established pattern of the drugged, duped, CIA patsy."

Sirhan: "They used me, framed me, and they set me up to die."

Reynolds: "Do you remember firing the gun that was in your hand?"

Sirhan: "I can't remember. I was blacked out. I remember feeling woozy and it felt like I was falling down....I don't remember the things that happened that night."

Reynolds: "Do you remember being led in handcuffs out of the Ambassador Hotel and made to sit in the back seat of a police car?"

Sirhan: "I remember being led away but I didn't know why they were doing this to me. Nobody told me anything."

He was interrogated by the police for about 24 hours, detectives telling him he murdered JFK. "They yelled at me. They kept shoving papers at me demanding that I sign...They were documents saying I killed Kennedy. Confession. They insisted I had murdered Robert F. Kennedy and they demanded I confess and sign the papers....At first I resisted, but later I confessed and signed the papers. They broke me down and I told them I would do anything they wanted me to do. I just wanted it to stop."

After he confessed, he was taken to a cell and allowed to sleep. A court trial followed where his "interrogators convinced me to plead guilty and ask for the death penalty....I told the judge I was guilty and wanted the death penalty," explaining he was ashamed.

"They made me believe I had murdered Robert Kennedy in cold blood and I was remorseful and ashamed. Everyone said I was guilty. They said I would get the death penalty....no matter what I said or did. They said it was an open and shut case and that I might as well give up. I just wanted to get the whole thing over with and if it meant me being dead, so be it. I didn't have anything left to live for anyway."

A trial followed, Sirhan represented by attorney Grant Cooper, a man he called "crooked. He had mafia and CIA connections," Sirhan explaining what he knew and his mob involvement. "He was (picked) to make sure I was convicted and sent to my death, and Cooper complied because they were planning to kill him" otherwise.

Reynolds asked him to portray what he remembered doing at the Ambassador Hotel. Sirhan stood up, swayed, his arms gently rising, looked straight ahead, then made a gun shape with his right hand, his arm parallel to the ground pretending to shoot, saying:

"At a specific moment, and I can't remember when or why, I shot my 22 caliber pistol three times. My arms were unsteady but level with the ground. Two of the shots missed. I saw them miss. One of the shots may have bounced off him like a BB. All of a sudden people were grabbing me. They were forcing me down....Did anybody say I reached around behind and shot Robert Kennedy in the back of the head?"

Reynolds: "Nobody."

Sirhan: "But that's what I would've had to do" to kill him....So, what do you think of me now? Do you think I am crazy like they say?"

Not at all, said Reynolds, Sirhan adding "I am just a man. I am a man just like you. I am trained never to allow an inmate to touch me."

In parting, he embraced Reynolds, both of them now "secret friends in a desolate place."

A Final Comment

Evidence strongly suggests that Lee Harvey Oswald, James Earl Ray, and Sirhan Sirhan were patsies, blamed for state-sponsored assassinations, likely carried out by CIA operatives or hired guns they enlisted.

Jack Ruby, with known mob and police connections, fatally shot Oswald on November 22, 1963. Incarcerated without trial, James Earl Ray died in prison on April 23, 1998, proclaiming his innocence. Sirhan Sirhan has been imprisoned since 1968, despite no evidence proving his guilt.

In these and hundreds more cases in US courts, justice was denied, revealing the myth of the rule of law, under a system absolving high-level crime, getting patsies punished for offenses they didn't commit, the major media always going along, supporting official accounts without question.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
posted by Steve Lendman @ 2:57 AM  


\clip\2011\12