historical perspectives, latest
Comments 23

The Assassination of Senator Robert F. Kennedy: Questions, Hints and Allegations

by Edward Curtin

If you were going to arrange a political assassination in an indoor crowded setting, would you plan to have one of your operatives (not the assassin) at the murder site be a strikingly curvaceous young woman in a conspicuous white dress with black polka-dots, and then have her flee the scene, yelling, “We’ve shot him, we’ve shot him,” so that multiple witnesses would see and hear her as she made her escape?

Would you have the same woman earlier in the day pick up a salesman in the hotel where the assassination was planned, spend the day with him driving around and having dinner together, while repeatedly inviting (i.e. luring) him to join her later that night at a big public event where they will shoot their famous victim, whom she names?

Would you have your operative tell this man that, although she wasn’t staying at the hotel, and although she had been in town only three days, having flown from NYC where she had arrived from overseas, that she knew the hotel stair routes very well, including an unobtrusive one that she shows the man?

Would you have this woman tell this man that a few days earlier she had met with a very famous political operative (whom she names), diametrically opposed to your victim’s political philosophy and that she would need to flee the country after the assassination and would like the man’s help?

Would you have your operative in the tight dress so conspicuously lay down a trail of breadcrumbs from morning until night, until she made her escape, never to be found despite having been seen by more than a dozen credible witnesses at the shooting site?

I think you would agree that you would have to be extremely stupid to plan an assassination in this manner, except if you were extremely devious, and the voluptuous stand-out girl was part of your intricate plot to create a false lead to someone other than the assassins.

This is exactly what happened when Senator Robert Kennedy, the presumptive Democratic nominee for president, was shot shortly after midnight on June 5, 1968 at the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles, after celebrating his victory in the California Democratic Primary. The woman in question came to be known as “the girl in the polka-dot dress,” but unlike the ways we associate girls with innocence, this woman was a key player in hideous evil.

Former President John F. Kennedy with his wife in a limousine prior to his assassination (Source: Wikipedia)

While many people are aware that President John Kennedy was killed five years earlier in a conspiracy organized by U.S. intelligence operatives and that Lee Harvey Oswald was the “patsy” that he said he was, far fewer realize that Robert Kennedy was also killed as a result of a conspiracy and that the convicted assassin Sirhan Sirhan did not kill RFK. In fact, not one bullet from his gun struck the senator. Sirhan was standing in front of Kennedy when, as the autopsy definitively showed, RFK was shot from the rear at point blank range, three bullets entering his body, with the fatal head-shot coming upward at a 45 degree angle from 1-3 inches behind his right ear. In addition, an audio recording shows that many more bullets than the eight in Sirhan’s gun were fired in the hotel pantry that night. It was impossible for Sirhan to have killed RFK.

While Sirhan still sits in prison to this day, the real killers of Senator Kennedy went free that night. For anyone who studies the case with an impartial eye (see this, this, this, this, and this), the evidence is overwhelming that there was a very sophisticated conspiracy at work, one that continued long after as police, FBI, intelligence agencies, and the legal system covered up the true nature of the crime. That Sirhan was hypnotized to play his part as seeming assassin is also abundantly clear.

But it is not my intention here to detail all the facts of the case that still scream out for justice, as do the linked assassinations of JFK and MLK. In fact, referring to the Kennedy assassination is a misnomer; we should speak of the Kennedy assassinations, since JFK wasn’t the only one.

I would like to focus on the so-called “girl in the polka-dot dress,” and ask you to think along with me as we explore why she was so conspicuous that day and night, and what function she may have served. I know you will agree that it is counterintuitive for her to have behaved the way she did. Counterintuitive for the general public, that is.

The best detailed day-to-day account of this mysterious girl is in the book linked to above by Fernando Faura, The Polka-Dot File: on the Robert F. Kennedy Killing (see my review here). Faura writes:

Seconds after the shooting stopped, a young woman in a polka-dot dress ran out of the kitchen, past Sandra Serrano [see video], a Kennedy campaign worker. The woman shouted, ‘We shot him, we shot him.’ Asked who they shot, the woman replied, ‘Kennedy,’ and ran into the morning darkness, never to be found.”

Although Serrano was interviewed by Sandy Vanocur of NBC News on live TV at 1:30 AM shortly after the shooting, she – as well as other eyewitnesses to this girl – was browbeaten by the police to retract her story, yet she never did. The police shut down its pursuit of this girl, despite all the witnesses. The LAPD officer in charge of the investigation, Lt. Manny Pena, was CIA connected, having worked for U.S. AID and been recently brought back to control the investigation. So too was the brutal interrogator, Sgt. Hank Hernandez, CIA affiliated.

It is obvious that this girl was part of a conspiracy to kill Robert Kennedy and that it is equally obvious that she was meant to stand out, be seen, and to be heard shouting what she did. Why?

Logically it follows that she was meant to create false leads, and generate mystery when there was none. Writing of the JFK assassination, Vince Salandria, the eminent and early critic of the government’s false conspiracy story, has recently said something quite appropriate to the RFK case and this girl:

The Kennedy assassination is a false mystery. It was conceived by the conspirators to be a false mystery which was designed to cause interminable debate. The purpose of the protracted debate was to obscure what was quite clearly and plainly a coup d’état…President Kennedy was assassinated by our national-security state…”

While far fewer people have yet to question the false narrative in the RFK case, when or if they do they will find that the polka-dot girl’s actions and her disappearance could keep them guessing for a long time, and that that guessing will lead away from the obvious and essential truth.

The investigative journalist Robert Parry has written about how Richard Nixon sabotaged a possible peace accord in Vietnam in the summer/fall of 1968. This he did through an intermediary, right-wing Republican Chinese émigré Anna Chennault, wife of General Claire Chennault, legendary founder of the Flying Tigers. Parry explains,

Nixon’s gambit was to have Chennault pass on word to South Vietnamese President Thieu that if he boycotted Johnson’s Paris peace talks – thus derailing the negotiations – Nixon would assure Thieu continued U.S. military support for the war.”

This treachery has been confirmed. Having stumbled on Parry’s work in 2014, the reporter Fernando Faura was startled to find himself connecting the girl in the polka-dot dress to Anna Chennault and to Nixon. This was because he remembered that the man, John Fahey, who had spent all day with the girl on June 4, 1968 and dropped her off in the evening at the Ambassador Hotel, had told him that the political operative she had met with three days before the assassination was Anna Chennault.

Faura speculates that perhaps Nixon was therefore connected to RFK’s assassination because he feared that, if Robert Kennedy were to become the Democratic presidential nominee, he would push to end the Vietnam War and would be more likely that anyone else to defeat him in the general election. He speculates that the “peace talks” conspiracy might have been the origin of the Kennedy killing; that the two conspiracies were connected.

But at the same time Faura writes:

Why is the CIA’s shadow all over this?”

And since the CIA’s shadow is all over the RFK assassination, we are left to ask if Nixon and the CIA were operating on the same page. Or was it the reverse, that Nixon and the CIA were at odds? Did the CIA remove Nixon from office with Watergate? Could the girl have been used to create a false lead to Nixon? Or was it something else again? Was it simply fortuitous that Sirhan’s Palestinian Arabic origins were emphasized and that his lawyers, who in no way defended him, suggested that he was mad at RFK for supporting the sending of planes to Israel and the oppression of the Palestinians by Israel? What were Kennedy’s positions vis-à- vis Israel? Who was the girl? What country had she come from when she arrived in NYC three days before?

Many questions leading hither and yon originate with this girl. And it is obvious that she was meant to do that: to muddy the waters and keep people guessing once they came to realize that Sirhan obviously did not kill RFK. And she “disappeared” as quickly as she “appeared.” And the authorities shut down their investigation and pursuit of her. They denied her existence against all the evidence. Meant to stand out, she was also meant to go out, leaving a trail of questions.

Former Congressman Allard Lowenstein, who was investigating Robert Kennedy’s killing and was also strangely murdered, put it well:

Robert Kennedy’s death, like the President’s, was mourned as an extension of senseless violence; events moved on, and the profound alterations that these deaths…brought in the equation of power in America was perceived as random…. What is odd is not that some people thought it was all random, but that so many intelligent people refused to believe that it might be anything else. Nothing can measure more graphically how limited was the general under- standing of what is possible in America.

While such pseudo-innocence prevailed then and is still very widespread, perhaps no one epitomized the twisted mind games played by intelligence agencies more than James Jesus Angleton, the notorious CIA Counterintelligence Chief for so many years, in whose safe were found gruesome photos of Robert Kennedy’s autopsy. Why, one may ask, were those photos there, since Angleton allegedly had no connection to the RFK killing and since Sirhan was said to be the assassin? Was Angleton’s work as CIA liaison with Israeli any way connected?

As I wrote earlier, if one objectively studies the assassination of Senator Kennedy, one cannot but conclude there was a government conspiracy and that Sirhan is not guilty. That much is not particularly complicated, although many people not familiar with the facts of the case may think otherwise.

The mystery girl is another matter. Everything about her has served to hypnotize, first Sirhan, and then those seeking to get to the deeper forces behind this American tragedy.

Robert Kennedy, like his brother John, was a great danger to those virulent forces of war and oppression within his own government, and he died opposing them as a true patriot.

We should honor him on this day – June 6th – that he died; honor him by pursuing the truth of why he died and why it still matters. Because it does.

Edward Curtin is a writer whose work has appeared widely. He teaches sociology at Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts. His website is http://edwardcurtin.com/

23 Comments

  1. “Charles de Gaulle’s information minister Alain Peyrefitte, wrote a book which was never translated into English entitled “C’etait de Gaulle” (About de Gaulle). In it the French president, just home from JFK’s funeral, confides to Peyrefitte that he knew that the CIA was behind the assassination.”

    De Gaulle’s quote sheds a clear light on the American people’s refusal to face reality, and is a pertinent today as it was then:

    “What happened to Kennedy is what nearly happened to me. His story is the same as mine …. The security forces were in cahoots with the extremists …. But you’ll see. All of them together will observe the law of silence. They will close ranks. . . . . In order to not ask themselves questions. They don’t want to know. They don’t want to find out. They won’t allow themselves to find out.”

    The entire top tier of progressive leadership in the United States was “assassinated” within a five year period and all these decades later we still we live in a country in which citizens “won’t allow themselves to find out.”

    Like

  2. bill says

    Had RFK lost in California its way less likely he would have been assassinated ….the Kennedy family knew within days that the plotters behind JFKs real killers were way too poweful to ever be brought to justice unless another Kennedy or a close ally held the Presidency ….RFK kept this quiet;Garrison believed this reticence made him a better target;seems he was right;he knew a thing or 2 about political assassinations and the costs of standing up against them.
    Much more plausible that PDL was losing it which Fahey had picked up on during their bizaare time together earlier that day where she was clearly being watched and was a hynotic trigger for Sirhan .Her shouting- out made the obvious lone nut a member of a conspiracy which neither Special Unit Senator nor the DPD wanted at all,having to wheel out Valerie Schulte on crutches! their best shot ,which was so outrageous it increased justifiable suspicion amongst all serious researchers.. ..they did not want this..they did not want to have to browbeat SS.nor did they want an honest cop wandering about telling folk that the stop placed on the search for PDL was unheard-of police behaviour esp in such a huge murder case….If the PDL was in fact Shirin Khan it seems v probable she was flown out that night as she had become a risk.Frank Sturgiss remarks to Marita Lorenz as gathered by Mark Lane reveal that male assassins believe women are much more likely to talk under pressure and be a liability for their future safety in a plot
    Theres no doubt of course that Sirhan was a chosen MK Ultra patsy- for full psychological evidence see Shane OSullivans wensite- and has suffered more than any man alive to the ongoing knowledge of the real killers and their heirs which is why any light from parole which might begin to demand a new investigation is snuffed out at birth…..so it actually doesnt help when folk even if victims in the pantry show up after decades pleading for mercy in his defence as its very probable too that Sirhan was firing blanks and didnt injure anyone and there was a real shooter behind him as well as one not necessarily Eugene Cesar the security guard immediately behind RFK though he does seem the best bet for the upward shot to the head from point-blank range whichCoroner Noguchi s scrupulous autopsy showed killed RFK…
    “Why didnt this come out at the trial you may scream?” His attorney “stipulated” to a waiver of such vital evidencs! from the jurys examination! His lawyer then walked away from charges of ethical impropriety if not criminal which would have crippled any other attorneys career.

    Like

  3. Edwige says

    Some other fishy things from the RFK assassination:

    1) The entire room where the crime took place was removed making it impossible to investgate the evidence of shooting properly (both in terms of the number and direction of shots).
    2) Sirhan remembers nothing of the assassination which may suggest mind-control.
    3) RFK spent his last night on earth at the Tate-Polanski house. An American investigator is also adamant that Sirhan was seen by the INS at the Tate-Polanski house.
    4) RFK was assassinated on the 5/6 and numbers 5 and 6 are the most significant in occult numerology.

    The RFK assassination appears to have much in common with John Lennon’s. Mark Chapman also appears to have been under some sort of mind-control and to have been used to create a distraction from the true assassin (the doorman of the Dakota Building – which just happens to be the setting of ‘Rosemary’s Baby’ – who had been at the Bay of Pigs).

    Like

  4. Alan says

    Mr Kennedy’s murder and the subsequent subterfuge is as disgusting as that of Marilyn Monroe or Mary Jo Kopechne. To call Mr Kennedy a true patriot and bestow honour ignores his and his families political and personal affiliations. Thomas C. Reeves’ “A Question of Character: A Life of John F. Kennedy” and Seymour M. Hersh’s “The Dark Side of Camelot.” provide a perspective that leaves the reader with few doubts as to Robert Kennedy’s character.

    Like

    • Matt says

      Agreed. Certain conspiracy theorists take JFK’s assassination as proof that he was targeted by the scary “deep state.”

      Such people can not be reasoned with. They’ll find any reason to make JFK their saviour. Remember the hysteria with Sandy Hook? It’s the same.

      Like

  5. BigBG says

    Highly visible woman runs out runs out of the Ambassador Hotel shouting “we shot him. we shot him” – 46 (count ’em) years later – reporter/ author Faura tenuously links long disappeared woman to Anna Chennault, linking in Nixon? Gee, that’s a strong lead?
    Sure, the CIA killed RFK; Sirhan Sirhan was MK ULTRAed out of his mind. Plenty, including John Pilger, heard the 13 shots. It was like an indoor turkey shoot. Bobby knew too much, was anti-war, and would have probably investigated Lyndon Johnson for his brothers death. Plenty of reasons to kill him.
    Perhaps, if the original investigators had looked into his very public murder as a cover up for JFK’s murder they might have got somewhere. Not that they had any intention of doing so – they might have found the same cabal involved. That cabal no doubt did contain Nixon, LBJ, and Bush the Greater Evil. Not that there is any evidence to back my supposition. But then, nor is there any evidence here.
    Better to concentrate on Anna Chennault (who was almost certainly CIA herself, IMO) for what she did do – facilitate Nixon/Kissinger’s treason – viz. the ’68 ‘October Surprise.’ A better lead on Watergate (also from Robert Parry) is that the ‘Plumbers’ may well have been looking for Johnson’s ‘X’ file (including the FBI surveillance on Anna Chennault.) No reason to hint or allege. Unless you’ve got a book to sell.
    https://consortiumnews.com/2016/05/13/lbjs-x-file-on-nixons-treason-3/

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Dead World Walking says

    The war machine does not tolerate interference.
    The psychotic plutocrats do not tolerate interference.
    Interference is either mocked (like Corbyn) or murdered.

    Like

    • Looks like Mossad disinformation to me “Mark”. Crude antisemitism which looks like a trap for any website that links to it. “See how the Lefties allow this hatred to go unchallenged etc etc”. These people never give up.

      Liked by 1 person

      • “The CIA is a Communist Jewish anti American organization.”

        Yup: fairly hilarious. Plus a gratuitous Elizabeth Short (r.i.p.) shock-photo, too… yipes. Not useful.

        Like

  7. Greg Bacon says

    Nearly one year later of the cowardly and savage Israeli attack on the USS Liberty, when Americans might of started asking “Why did Israel, our ally, attack one of our ships?” they were too grief stricken by the news of another Kennedy being murdered, by a Palestinian, no less.

    How neat and tidy was that? We get shunted off to look at anther gory scene and Israel gets Carte Blanche to slowly murder, torture, disappear and steal Palestine to death.
    When the pace of murder and theft was proving too slow for the Israeli land thieves, we get hit with 9/11 and the spectacle of the USA waging endless wars against Israel’s perceived enemies.

    Like

  8. Yonatan says

    There is a similar distraction by deception background story to the 9/11 attacks. Prior to the attacks substantial numbers (120 or more) of Israelis posing as ‘art students’ infiltrated DEA, DoD and other government offices, leading to a US investigation into what was going on. The ‘art students’ claimed to be trying to sell works of art, cheap, tacky stuff. One yturned out to be an (ex-)Israeli military intelligence officer. This activity took resources away from other actual threats, distracting the US from something.

    https://web.archive.org/web/20070313201649/https://www.counterpunch.org/ketcham03072007.html

    Like

  9. Bob Van Noy says

    I’ve just finished reading “The Polca Dot File On The Robert F. Kennedy Killing: The Paris Peace Talks Connection” by Furnando Faura

    If you click on the link above to Sandra Serrano you will see immediately what a compelling witness she would have been in describing the polka-dot woman who the LA proscecution failed to pursue. It turns out that she was probably a CIA asset and had met the week befor the assassination in New York with Anna Chennault a major Nixon financial backer and operator of what would become Air America.
    I read the briefs in the Sirhan parole trial, and he deserves a new trial based upon new evidence.
    Dr. William Pepper is his lawyer and is quite capable of proving his innocence, given a chance.
    Here is a link to the book: https://www.amazon.com/dp/1634240596/ref=rdr_ext_tmb

    Like

    • profecto says

      I read that book a couple of weeks ago, very strong evidence of a massive cover-up. Pity the book was badly in need of an editor – so many errors! – but well worth reading anyway.

      Like

  10. “What is odd is not that some people thought it was all random, but that so many intelligent people refused to believe that it might be anything else.”

    AD 1700-2100 in a nutshell.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. pywacket says

    RFK likely knew much of the truth about his brother’s murder and would’ve been in a good position to pursue the guilty parties if he became president. He was a very loose end that had to be wrapped up.

    Like

  12. summitflyer says

    I firmly believe that nothing much has changed regarding the machinations of the CIA and all it’s allied alphebet soup groups in the US .Just who actually runs the US ? It is not who the people elect.

    Like

    • pywacket says

      The people with the most money have the most power, globally and locally. Things have changed in that money and power are both being consolidated among a very small group of elite madmen.

      Like

      • pywacket – this isn’t strictly true because power – in terms of leverage and influence – uses wealth as financial leverage – but power also manipulates wealthy people or people of influence.
        And I feel to note that financial leverage isn’t how much you have – so much as how much flows through you. So when Dubai couldn’t service it debts it shocked people because they assume richest means most money – when in a debt-leveraging system access to capital, can be used to rig, capture or manipulate systems – as long as you can pay the overheads or undercurrent conditions to stay in the game.

        I see the meme of accepting powerlessness (in relation to the very small group of elite madmen seen as powerful) – as the potential to flip into a very large rage of vengeance – that the insider opportunists tap into as leverage to gain positions of power over the process that changes one set of rulers for another. And perhaps behind the seeming powers who get the guillotine are the shadow power that contrives of nurtures this pattern of polarisation, charge and discharge as the power source.

        Another thing is that dehumanising or denying others always dehumanises and corrupts ourself.
        Self-hate immediately projects out to our world and onto our relationships and can drive an ambition to overcome or defy opposition in ways that are blind. If I effectively re-enact my formative conflicts over and over again in terms of externalised versions of that script – I respond not to what is present but in terms of the triggering of past conditioned reaction.

        The power game is a reverse to the blame game – in which the assignment of penalty is evaded or diverted and projected – or in corporate terms ‘outsourced’. And the power or ability to do this is the manipulation of the mind by which to come out on top while someone else pays.
        Guilt is a believed debt that cannot be paid, but in limited sacrifice is the belief that penalty can be appeased, and then by assigning or directing blame to others penalty can be escaped so that the other pays your debt and you are ‘saved’. If blaming did not seem to offer salvation, we would see it merely damns.

        But there’s a reason this cant be easily discussed – and that is because it operates in secret and defends against exposure – as the way to hold an exclusive focus in a sense of self-illusion at expense of true. Such self-illusion is investment by which the mind operates only in its terms and can no longer see or hear anything true. To such a mind ‘truth is dead; ergo; truth is what I say it is’ or I am what I assert I am. But no force or intensity of assertion changes what you are – only what you do – and your fruits of such act by which you know not what you do – because it now seems to be something happening or being done to you.

        Growing willingness for true operates out of range of the fear-control mechanism – but true witness extends to the truth in all – and seeds there regardless of when or how that will fruit in any particular instance. For in the reverse to tyranny, freedom from fear cannot be thrust upon you. Your willingness is where its presence is. The willingness to identify in reverse elite worship is a negative idol by which you can seem to escape responsibility for being you – which is NOT a debt of guilt or sin – but an awakened responsibility for your wholeness of being – so as not to divide and rule out a true or free awareness – but true sovereignty or individuality of being – which is undividable in truth and so lost only to deceit finding a way to disempower by a ruse of getting more power for yourself than others – and at the expense of others.

        The economic hit-man says to the political leader”sell your people into debt and destruction and we will let you keep a position of power and privilege for your personal gratification – but on our terms’. If you don’t sign up you get taken out or undermined and replaced. Now are you here to represent who sent you – or seeking your own personal aggrandizement?

        Like

    • Enyalion says

      About the only change is that now they know that they are more securely entrenched and in control, and so don’t feel that they have to be so invisible. They will continue to stifle and destroy dissenting voices, and will do so in more and more open obedience to their masters.

      Like

.....................

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s