Speaker 1: From UFOs to psychic powers and government conspiracies. History is
Speaker 1: riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
Speaker 1: learn the stuff they don't want you to know. A
Speaker 1: production of iHeart Radio.
Speaker 2: Hello, welcome back to the show. My name is Matt,
Speaker 2: my name is Noel.
Speaker 3: They called me Ben. We're joined as always with our
Speaker 3: super producer Paul Mission Controlled decad Most importantly, you are here.
Speaker 3: That makes this the stuff they don't want you to know.
Speaker 3: This evening, we're returning to one of the strangest cases
Speaker 3: of assassination in US history, which is saying a lot
Speaker 3: if you know anything about US history. We talked about
Speaker 3: parts of this story in numerous previous episodes. Do check
Speaker 3: out our work on the assassination of JFK in nineteen
Speaker 3: sixty three. Also check out Rob Reiner's excellent recent deep
Speaker 3: dive Who Killed JFK, And then also look into some
Speaker 3: of our previous work in this and other shows on
Speaker 3: the death of JFK's brother, Robert Kennedy just five years
Speaker 3: later in nineteen sixty eight.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, there's a ton of previous work. We would
Speaker 2: send everybody over to listen to the RFK tapes, which
Speaker 2: is a show that came out June fifth, twenty eighteen,
Speaker 2: exactly fifty years after the assassination of RFK. It's Really Good,
Speaker 2: hosted by a guy named Zach Stewart Pontier and Bill Klaber,
Speaker 2: who then went on to host the MLK tapes that
Speaker 2: we made in twenty twenty two about Martin Luther King's
Speaker 2: assassination also in nineteen sixty eight.
Speaker 3: It was a heck of a year.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, and just up top, guys, I wanted to
Speaker 2: mention this because I literally found out as I was
Speaker 2: doing research for this episode, the connective tissue between rfk's
Speaker 2: assassination and mlk's assassination is this attorney named William Pepper.
Speaker 2: He was a big part of the MLK. Well, he
Speaker 2: was interviewed for the RFK tapes, but he's a big
Speaker 2: part of the MLK tapes, and the host Bill Klaber,
Speaker 2: spent a bunch of time with him in his home
Speaker 2: and I just found out he passed away on April
Speaker 2: seventh this year.
Speaker 4: Yeah, this year.
Speaker 2: Really sad. He's like an amazing human being that's done
Speaker 2: an incredible amount of work and it's just really sad
Speaker 2: that he's.
Speaker 3: Passed and he has quite a record, mister Pepper of activism,
Speaker 3: of investigation.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and well he represented Syrah and Syrian and he
Speaker 2: also represented James Earl ray On, behalf of the King family.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it may surprise some of us, especially younger listeners.
Speaker 3: You might hear us some an assassination happened multiple in
Speaker 3: nineteen sixty eight. That was a long time ago, so
Speaker 3: it might it might baffle you to realize that the
Speaker 3: man who murdered RFK is alive today. The man who
Speaker 3: was convicted a first degree murder in the case of
Speaker 3: Robert Kennedy is alive today. In fact, he almost got
Speaker 3: parole not too long ago, and his legal team has
Speaker 3: been attempting to get him parolled for decades as well.
Speaker 3: We had in our episode on Drugs as Weapons, we
Speaker 3: had a conversation about Jimson whed and Datura. Yeah, it
Speaker 3: prompted us to return to a question that well over
Speaker 3: thirty five percent of Americans have been asking for a
Speaker 3: very long time. Was rfk's assassin, Sirhan Sirhan involved in
Speaker 3: a conspiracy? Here are the facts. First, I mean, I
Speaker 3: feel like maybe we're in an information bubble because the
Speaker 3: three of us know or the four of us know
Speaker 3: who Sirran Sirrahan is, But do we think most people
Speaker 3: know or is it just a name they might have heard.
Speaker 4: I think it might largely be a name I might
Speaker 4: have heard, simply because it's kind of remarkable as a name,
Speaker 4: you know, it immediately makes you sort of take notice
Speaker 4: with what, what's a double name? What's that about? And also,
Speaker 4: by the way, Jimson Weed, doesn't that sound like a
Speaker 4: nom de plume for like some sort of Southern Fried
Speaker 4: like author or something. I really like.
Speaker 3: We like him as an old prospector. Yeah, his dog's
Speaker 3: name is silver, of course. Okay, yeah, I think I
Speaker 3: was on that episode.
Speaker 4: But I do love that. Sirhan Bishara Sirhan Man literally's
Speaker 4: first name, last name, same thing that must have been intentional.
Speaker 4: Was born in Jerusalem mandatory really yeah wow, mandatory Palestine.
Speaker 4: It's very consistent upon itself on March nineteenth, nineteen forty four.
Speaker 4: He was raised as a Palestinian Christian and was also
Speaker 4: born with Jordanian citizenship. He moved to the US at
Speaker 4: the age of twelve, to New York and then eventually
Speaker 4: to California, where he attended Pasadena City College.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's kind of an American dream. Sirahan has as
Speaker 3: of this point not acquired US citizenship and remains a
Speaker 3: citizen of the nation of Jordan. I love your point
Speaker 3: out religion because he was always a fervent Christian growing up,
Speaker 3: and like many people, he was on a search for
Speaker 3: spiritual meaning, so he evaluated several different Christian denominations. As
Speaker 3: an adult, he attended Baptist services, he spent time as
Speaker 3: a Seventh Day Adventist, and eventually he joined an esoteric
Speaker 3: organization called the Rosicrucians in nineteen sixty six, which will
Speaker 3: be familiar to longtime listeners.
Speaker 4: For sure, the Order of the Rose Cross.
Speaker 3: Yes, yeah, in his case he joined the largest one,
Speaker 3: the ancient mystical Order of the Rose Cross. Its describes
Speaker 3: itself as a fraternal order, a philosophical, a political order
Speaker 3: that is devoted to quote, the study of the elusive
Speaker 3: mysteries of life and the universe. Nothing weird, nothing vague.
Speaker 4: Well, folks might remember that from our conversations around the
Speaker 4: Georgia guidestones and the potential identity of R. C. Christian,
Speaker 4: which that you know, a pseudonym RC believed to be
Speaker 4: referring to Rose Cross and then was a member of
Speaker 4: that order as well, which has a lot of parallels
Speaker 4: to Freemason kind of ideology.
Speaker 3: Yeah, this is I'm glad you mentioned that as well,
Speaker 3: because Rosicrucianism is already bound up in multiple unrelated conspiracy theories.
Speaker 3: So for the many people who believe there's more to
Speaker 3: Sirhan Sirhan's story, whatever that might be, this association can
Speaker 3: feel like not quite a red flag, but maybe a
Speaker 3: rosy one, a not worth it, I don't.
Speaker 4: Know, look of the world through Rosaicretian colored glasses.
Speaker 3: You will, However, Surhan Surhan is now not famous for
Speaker 3: not best known for being a member of a rose
Speaker 3: Crucian order, is unfortunately best known for the assassination of
Speaker 3: Senator Robert Kennedy at the Ambassador Hotel on June fifth,
Speaker 3: nineteen sixty eight, the one year anniversary of the nineteen
Speaker 3: sixty seven Arab Israeli War.
Speaker 2: And another name for that war is the Sixth Day War.
Speaker 2: You can look that up if you'd like to. It's
Speaker 2: another one of those times in history where there was
Speaker 2: there was a lot of often hidden and sometimes overt
Speaker 2: anti Israel sentiment.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and a lot of Islamophobia as well. A lot
Speaker 3: of bad blood is the best way to put it.
Speaker 3: This is also known as the Third Arab Israeli War,
Speaker 3: and it's called Arab Israeli, of course, is a specific state.
Speaker 3: It's called Arab because a coalition of Arab states. We're
Speaker 3: on the other side of the conflict, primarily Syria, Egypt,
Speaker 3: and Sirhan, Sirhan's homeland of Jordan. So there's a lot
Speaker 3: of context that goes into this, and will later learn
Speaker 3: what Sirhan himself says about this, and then later reneges
Speaker 3: upon a couple of times. Things are On the day
Speaker 3: of his death on June fifth, nineteen sixty eight, things
Speaker 3: are looking pretty great for Robert Kennedy. It's a very
Speaker 3: tense situation. You know, if you've ever lost a sibling,
Speaker 3: you don't just get over it. So the death of
Speaker 3: his brother and one of his closest friends is still
Speaker 3: very much haunting him. And like the rest of America,
Speaker 3: Robert Kennedy has very serious questions about the official investigation
Speaker 3: into the murder of JFK.
Speaker 2: Well, as we learned with our previous look at JFK,
Speaker 2: his brother RFK that we're talking about today, is he
Speaker 2: owes his political rear to his brother, right, Like he
Speaker 2: was brought into the fold by JFK essentially appointed, and
Speaker 2: you know, America overall was not too happy about RFK
Speaker 2: getting appointed to where he was, Like remember when he
Speaker 2: brought when he was brought in as I think attorney general.
Speaker 3: He was yes, without despite not having qualifications to be
Speaker 3: attorney general.
Speaker 2: So you can imagine they're not just brothers. They're like
Speaker 2: in a way, business partners, very closely tied right in
Speaker 2: their political careers. So when JFK is assassinated, it's let's say,
Speaker 2: it was of high interest to his brother and business partner.
Speaker 3: And just like his brother, Kennedy, Robert Kennedy is no
Speaker 3: fan of the company or the agency, the CIA. They
Speaker 3: do not get along.
Speaker 2: He in the FBI right because because of some of
Speaker 2: the implications that had been going on with activity, let's say,
Speaker 2: monitoring activities by the FBI.
Speaker 3: Yeah, these are the days of a different kind of
Speaker 3: wire tapping than people labor under in this country. In
Speaker 3: twenty twenty four, Robert Kennedy is running for president. He
Speaker 3: is the Democratic front runner. Right now, he's in California.
Speaker 3: He has successfully done his bit to achieve like to
Speaker 3: get one step closer to being the Democratic candidate for
Speaker 3: the next presidential election. So he's at the Ambassador Hotel.
Speaker 3: The reason we're bringing up the CIA FBI connections, they
Speaker 3: go deep. It's also interesting to note that he has
Speaker 3: a lot of unofficial bodyguards at this point, several athletes
Speaker 3: who just believe in his cause, believe in his mission,
Speaker 3: and he has been on record saying to the FBI
Speaker 3: and CIA associate it's like, stay away, you know what
Speaker 3: I mean. I don't need your involvement here. I am
Speaker 3: running a presidency for the people, so I want to
Speaker 3: meet the people.
Speaker 2: But he has a former FBI agent rolling with him, right.
Speaker 4: He does.
Speaker 3: He has a former FBI agent that we'll get to
Speaker 3: or or a former associate. We'll see, we'll see.
Speaker 2: Like Bill Berry, isn't it right? Am I wrong?
Speaker 3: I thought, Oh, I'm thinking of Thane Caesar, who was
Speaker 3: a security guard was in the in the area but
Speaker 3: not working directly with r fk.
Speaker 2: Oh Okay, not that was Bill Berry. There was a
Speaker 2: there's an ex FBI agent who was also rolling with
Speaker 2: him at the time when like at least when he well,
Speaker 2: we'll get to. But when he went into the area
Speaker 2: where he was shot.
Speaker 3: Emphasis on x FBI agent. What we're saying is that
Speaker 3: many of the people in the Ambassador Hotel at this
Speaker 3: time had interesting past all their own. Each could be
Speaker 3: an epic. Well, many of them could be their own episodes. Uh,
Speaker 3: we'll give you the official story, Sirhan. The court found
Speaker 3: Sirhan shot Robert Kennedy four to times with a twenty
Speaker 3: two caliber pistol, leading to Kennedy's death twenty six hours later,
Speaker 3: due primarily to injuries to the brainstem and to his head,
Speaker 3: his occipital lobe and so on. Other victims were there.
Speaker 3: Other people got shot. There were six shooting victims all
Speaker 3: in all, including some journalists, a democratic activist, a campaign volunteer.
Speaker 3: All of the other people except RFK survived thankfully. And
Speaker 3: Sirhan has tackled immediately he's brought to the ground. He's
Speaker 3: still firing wildly in the air by ourn.
Speaker 4: Tired football player, right.
Speaker 2: Yes, and Rayfer Johnson, who was an Olympic athlete and
Speaker 2: to Catalon gold medalist. Yeah, those two guys were the
Speaker 2: kind of the security detail we were talking about.
Speaker 4: Rosie Greer being the name of the La Rams I
Speaker 4: believe former football player.
Speaker 3: Yes, that's correct. No relation to the Rosicrucians that we
Speaker 3: know of, or there or. This is definitely an or
Speaker 3: is there episode, because when Sirhan is being taken down,
Speaker 3: he is alleged to have been yelling out things like
Speaker 3: I can explain, and I did this for my country.
Speaker 4: What a thing to say whilst mid shooting spree. No, really,
Speaker 4: give me a chance to explain. It's all good. Don't
Speaker 4: worry about it.
Speaker 3: Right, Yeah, like someone's gonna go wait, let's hear.
Speaker 4: Him out, Jesus.
Speaker 3: So later he would note in a couple of different conversations,
Speaker 3: he would note that he felt betrayed by rfk's support
Speaker 3: of Israel. There are there's a specific moment he cites
Speaker 3: where he says, I decided RFK had to die three
Speaker 3: weeks ago before I came to the Ambassador hotel because
Speaker 3: I was incensed by his that he was going to
Speaker 3: send military support to Israel, specifically jets.
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, in his pocket there was a newspaper clipping
Speaker 2: that specifically said, quote, the United States should, without delay,
Speaker 2: sell Israel the fifty phantom jets she has so long
Speaker 2: been promised, which is a quote from Kennedy in that clipping.
Speaker 2: And I think it can also be noted that when
Speaker 2: when Sire and Sirhan's home was rated, there was a
Speaker 2: notebook allegedly in there that had scribbling all over it
Speaker 2: quote RFK must die. Like like, we'll.
Speaker 3: Get to that too. Oh yeah, yeah, that's.
Speaker 4: The stuff of like conspiracy movies, you know where you
Speaker 4: see it like scrawled on the wall and blood or something,
Speaker 4: you know what I mean.
Speaker 3: Yeah, as we'll find later in this episode, it's definitely
Speaker 3: the stuff of premeditation.
Speaker 2: If he actually wrote it, put it there, just just
Speaker 2: putting that out there.
Speaker 3: Yep. And before it gets all of that, let's get
Speaker 3: to the let's go back to that specific day, the
Speaker 3: aftermathic conspiracy. As we said, he's captured, he's tacked, he
Speaker 3: is disarmed at the scene. A few days later, he
Speaker 3: confesses to the murder to police and interrogation, but then
Speaker 3: he pleads not guilty, and there's this trial that goes
Speaker 3: on for quite some time. A judge. His legal team
Speaker 3: later asked the judge to allow him to change his
Speaker 3: plead too guilty after those papers are found in his
Speaker 3: home that have what you would call highly implicating language,
Speaker 3: you know what I mean, kind of the way that
Speaker 3: a celebrity stalker might be found to have a bunch
Speaker 3: of writing in their home that for prosecution can function
Speaker 3: as evidence of escalation, right, evidence of going from compulsive
Speaker 3: thoughts to action. And this is a thing that happens.
Speaker 3: The question is, you know, the question about the providence
Speaker 3: of the handwriting, the origin of the writing, stuff like
Speaker 3: that that has been an extreme focus for a lot
Speaker 3: of what we will call independent researchers. Maybe he also
Speaker 3: he did something I don't know how to feel about this.
Speaker 3: According to witnesses and reporters during this lengthy trial, he
Speaker 3: behaved in an odd manner and for more I guess
Speaker 3: cynical or skeptical observers. They were certain that he was
Speaker 3: acting this way on purpose, trying to put on a
Speaker 3: show to bolster his legal team's argument that he had
Speaker 3: diminished capacities, diminished mental capacities at the time of the
Speaker 3: time of the murders and even during the trial. And
Speaker 3: we kind of, I hate to say it, but we
Speaker 3: do see that kind of attempt at theater in court
Speaker 3: cases in the US, you know, somebody is filing for
Speaker 3: a personal injury and they make sure that they show
Speaker 3: up like kitted out right, even if they might not
Speaker 3: need all the cast or the neck braces, et cetera.
Speaker 3: And then what's that thing. Like a lot of celebrities,
Speaker 3: there was this halcyon era in the nineties and early
Speaker 3: two thousands. Whenever a controversial celebrity or musician went to court,
Speaker 3: they always for some reason that glass is on.
Speaker 4: Yeah, because it makes you, like, what a little more
Speaker 4: approachable seeming, Not sunglasses though, right, like glass No, no, yeah,
Speaker 4: that would be the opposite of fact if it was
Speaker 4: anyone wearing sunglasses inside immediately sus. But now if you're
Speaker 4: wearing glasses, it makes oh, you're a human being, just
Speaker 4: you know, you have flaws, right, your eyes are are perfect.
Speaker 3: This guy couldn't have done it that much cocaine, like
Speaker 3: did his.
Speaker 4: Glasses almost did a spittack just sorry, well, let's talk.
Speaker 2: His demeanor was described really strangely when he was there,
Speaker 2: like at the assassination. So trial is one thing you're
Speaker 2: talking about. I've seen that too. But when he was
Speaker 2: there at scene, his calm demeanor was noted several times
Speaker 2: just how he acted. He acted and did a thing
Speaker 2: and then was calm. But they also described him as
Speaker 2: being quote not in complete control of his mind while
Speaker 2: at the scene, which what does that mean?
Speaker 4: Well, the calm aspect combined with that really makes me
Speaker 4: think of like someone's been activated, right, and then they're like,
Speaker 4: you know, kind of non emotionally going through these pre
Speaker 4: sat instructions, right, yeah, right.
Speaker 3: The idea then that a series of commands had been
Speaker 3: enacted and afterwards you're just done, the program has run. Right,
Speaker 3: that's the implication here, But there is there's even more
Speaker 3: to the story, which we'll get into. These are still
Speaker 3: just the facts. The jury was not convinced by this
Speaker 3: argument for diminished capacity. There are long standing questions about
Speaker 3: whether defense dropped the ball in some way and be
Speaker 3: that as it made. Sirhan was convicted on April seventeenth,
Speaker 3: nineteen sixty nine. He was sentenced to death in the
Speaker 3: gas chamber three years later. This sentence, like all of
Speaker 3: the death sentences in California, is commuted to life in prison,
Speaker 3: and that's due to a Supreme Court ruling People versus Anderson,
Speaker 3: which outlawed the death penalty in that state. So that
Speaker 3: was a blanket change. It's very important to note he
Speaker 3: was not singled out and getting his sentence commuted. The
Speaker 3: way that the way that George Bush did for those
Speaker 3: serial killers in Texas or for that one serial killer.
Speaker 3: But there's another strange aspect to the story that we
Speaker 3: have to give you right before we get to the
Speaker 3: ad break. It's one that remained consistent for quite some time.
Speaker 3: For decades, Sirhan. Sirhan has claimed he has little to
Speaker 3: no memory of the assassination at all.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and the reason why we're talking about this is
Speaker 2: because we talked about that drug and like what it
Speaker 2: would do in the moment, you could lose your memory.
Speaker 2: So I say we dive in to any of the
Speaker 2: possible conspiracy theories surrounding this thing and just go through
Speaker 2: each one.
Speaker 3: Yeah, we'll get to it after a word from our sponsors.
Speaker 3: Here's where it gets crazy. How does that old saying go?
Speaker 3: Every prison is full of innocent men, depending on who
Speaker 3: you ask. Sirhan's case is different because there is never
Speaker 3: really a question about whether he was in the room,
Speaker 3: whether he attacked RFK. Well, just say whether he attacked
Speaker 3: our FK. There's no question about that. Absolutely happened, multiple witnesses,
Speaker 3: ballistics evidence, he had a gun, he fired the gun,
Speaker 3: he admitted that, and earlier he had written, or he
Speaker 3: appears to have written, a manifesto calling for Kennedy's death.
Speaker 3: It's chock full of vitriolic language condemning Kennedy. It is
Speaker 3: clear and inarguable that he did not particularly care for RFK.
Speaker 3: But again, the world is full of people who don't
Speaker 3: like each other, and most of them never become assassins, right,
Speaker 3: most of them are just like it's Greg.
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, I think it creates a problem for anyone
Speaker 2: who comes after to look at this thing, because if
Speaker 2: you've got an individual who has a depresentment of someone,
Speaker 2: then they could be used as a very helpful We'll
Speaker 2: use the phrase that Rob Reiner used when we talk
Speaker 2: to him, patsy. That is the word that Lee Harvey
Speaker 2: Oswald used to describe himself in his situation. And if
Speaker 2: you've got somebody like Sirian Cyerhan who has a hatred
Speaker 2: or maybe even a psychological thing going on where he's
Speaker 2: writing down RFK must die in his notebook, if he
Speaker 2: has a gun and he's on premise, you know, for
Speaker 2: the place where let's say you're a group that's going
Speaker 2: to kill RFK, it would be a fall guy. It
Speaker 2: would be a pretty easy fall guy. But he did,
Speaker 2: according to multiple witnesses, he shot that gun see your
Speaker 2: hands here, and shot the gun that he had at RFK,
Speaker 2: hitting him. So it's a I don't know, but.
Speaker 3: Hitting is not necessarily not every gun shot is fatal.
Speaker 3: There you go, and we're going to learn some more
Speaker 3: specifics that that are troubling. Okay, So an interrelated couple
Speaker 3: of theories here, double dragon kind of theory set involves
Speaker 3: the idea of orchestrations by the CIA or CIA associates
Speaker 3: and a second gunman. Again, there's a lot in common
Speaker 3: with the allegation surrounding the JFK assassination. Just a few
Speaker 3: years prior. There was a twenty eighteen interview with Washington Post.
Speaker 3: A lot of the sources we're going to be talking
Speaker 3: about are coming kind of recently because there is a
Speaker 3: cyclical media interest in the Sirhan case whenever he comes
Speaker 3: up for parole. So Robert F. Kennedy Junior, a somewhat
Speaker 3: controversial political figure today, talks to the Washington Post in
Speaker 3: twenty eighteen and says, you know, I traveled out to
Speaker 3: California and I met Sirhan Sirhan where he is incarcerated,
Speaker 3: and I talked with him for a long time, and
Speaker 3: I left believing what Sirhan told me that he himself
Speaker 3: did not kill my father and that a second gunman
Speaker 3: was involved. And then RFK Junior's sister, Kathleen Kennedy Townsend,
Speaker 3: herself a politician, would later say that her brother made
Speaker 3: a compelling case. She talked to him about his conversation
Speaker 3: with Sirhan, and they both called for the investigation to
Speaker 3: be reopened. They also were pretty their credit. Take it
Speaker 3: as you will. RFK Junior said, I don't think that
Speaker 3: my opinion will really change anything, but I, as his son,
Speaker 3: I think Sirahn should be out of prison or we
Speaker 3: should at least look into this again.
Speaker 2: Isn't it weird? Guys? Isn't it weird that Martin Luther
Speaker 2: King Junior's son did the exact same thing, came forward,
Speaker 2: talked to his father's alleged assassin, was convinced by a
Speaker 2: bunch of research and witnesses and other evidence that was
Speaker 2: coming forward that this person wasn't the killer of his father,
Speaker 2: and tried to get him out of prison like that happened.
Speaker 2: These are two assassinations that occurred in nineteen sixty eight
Speaker 2: and they both have sons. Both men who were killed
Speaker 2: have sons that were convinced that the person who was
Speaker 2: in jail didn't kill their father.
Speaker 3: And now that's not the same thing as conclusively proving
Speaker 3: in a sense, but it is powerful.
Speaker 4: Yeah, it makes people take notice. You know. Those are
Speaker 4: usually the people that are like, yes, justice has been done,
Speaker 4: you know, I feel vindicated, or my father's death has
Speaker 4: been vindicated, as opposed to the exact opposite, which certainly
Speaker 4: makes people take a little bit of pause.
Speaker 3: Right, agreed. And we know that there has been extensive
Speaker 3: research into this because a lot of people, again weren't
Speaker 3: satisfied with the legal proceedings nor the government's conclusions. One
Speaker 3: book I want to give a big shout out to
Speaker 3: is A Lie Too Big to Fail, which you can
Speaker 3: read for free on archive dot org right now by
Speaker 3: an author named Lisa Peas Pea se and this author
Speaker 3: argues that the real mastermind of the assassination was not
Speaker 3: sir Han Sirhat, not a politically motivated lone wolf act,
Speaker 3: but instead a CIA fixer named Robert Mayhew. Have we
Speaker 3: heard we were talking about Mayhew a little bit off air.
Speaker 3: Have you guys heard about him? Dug into his story.
Speaker 3: Have you seen Mission Impossible?
Speaker 4: Of course, the new one on the plane recently and
Speaker 4: it was quite good.
Speaker 3: I don't know about the new one, but allegedly the
Speaker 3: Mission Impossible idea was based on his life in part.
Speaker 3: What would a movie series based on our lives be like?
Speaker 3: I don't know if it would be as exciting as
Speaker 3: Mission Impossible.
Speaker 2: Oh, we got time, we can write some more storylines.
Speaker 3: Geez, yeah, I gotta. It'll just be a cavalcated Casey
Speaker 3: is here. But Mayhew is fascinating because he has never
Speaker 3: been officially linked to the assassination. And the other CIA folks,
Speaker 3: which I'm sure we'll get to that we're in the
Speaker 3: area or for some reason, maybe operating, maybe just there,
Speaker 3: they have not been linked to the assassination. But may
Speaker 3: You in particular, has one a heck of a CV or,
Speaker 3: since we're talking about prison, he's got a hell of
Speaker 3: a jacket. He was an ex FBI agent and the
Speaker 3: CIA worked with him through his own private company, and
Speaker 3: they asked him job to handle jobs that it wanted
Speaker 3: to keep at an arm's length, it wanted at a
Speaker 3: remove you know.
Speaker 2: Wait a second, Yeah, Mayhew is one of the other
Speaker 2: guys that Rob Reiner in his show Who Killed JFK
Speaker 2: talks about with the the the anti Castro group.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, he Mayhew is There really were cases where
Speaker 3: someone would come to Mayhew under shady circumstances like this
Speaker 3: is your mission, should you choose to accept it. He'd
Speaker 3: lined up sex workers for Forton presidents, and he was
Speaker 3: the connection between the CIA and the MOB in at
Speaker 3: least one of the plans to kill Castro. He definitely,
Speaker 3: he definitely did this stuff. I want to shout out
Speaker 3: Chicago mag They have a great two thousand and seven
Speaker 3: right up on this by Brian Smith that talks about
Speaker 3: Mayhew's involvement.
Speaker 2: Geez man.
Speaker 3: So again, if you're looking for conspiracy, this guy is
Speaker 3: perfect casting because he actively did conspire to do some
Speaker 3: messed up stuff.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Well, and he's not the only JM wave associated
Speaker 2: guy that was there at the Ambassador Hotel on the
Speaker 2: day of the assassination, and we'll get into that. But
Speaker 2: this is this is nuts.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 3: His For more than a decade and a half, Mayhew
Speaker 3: and his company they Mitch out of Washington, they were
Speaker 3: on a monthly retainer with the CIA, and CIA records
Speaker 3: would later confirm this. So we don't have a direct
Speaker 3: connection with Mayhew and Sirhan, but you can see why
Speaker 3: so many authors and researchers they Paul us at this part. Oh,
Speaker 3: he also worked with Howard Hughes, and he would be
Speaker 3: like the fixer for the CIA and Howard Hughes, because
Speaker 3: Howard Hughes would fund CIA operations.
Speaker 2: Every so often just for fundzies.
Speaker 3: Yeah, what do you get the what do you get
Speaker 3: the company that has everything, you know, lots of tissue boxes.
Speaker 3: There we go, right, Oh geez? He also okay, so
Speaker 3: p says Mayhew. Given his involvement in the murcurer side
Speaker 3: of the trade, he would have had access to CIA
Speaker 3: experiments and hypnosism mind control. He would have been read
Speaker 3: on to things like Midnight Climax mk ultr. Everybody check
Speaker 3: out Midnight Climax, which is hosted by our own Noel Brown. Yeah,
Speaker 3: hell of a story.
Speaker 2: And mk Ultra ran from nineteen fifty three to seventy three,
Speaker 2: so we're in the tail end of mk ultra here.
Speaker 3: So they had lessons learned, right, They at least knew
Speaker 3: what didn't work, and they also officially ended in seventy three.
Speaker 3: So yeah, I know that sounds snarky, but officially ended
Speaker 3: whatever take it as will.
Speaker 2: They got the Internet, Yeah, they.
Speaker 3: Got the Internet, don't They don't need the LSD anymore. So.
Speaker 3: This author reasons that his knowledge of this and his
Speaker 3: previous involvement is deep connections would have allowed Mayhew and
Speaker 3: his crew to frame Sirran Sirhan as a patsy for
Speaker 3: the death of Robert Kennedy while having another gunman, like
Speaker 3: a professional operator, fire the fatal shots.
Speaker 2: Like another agent that we already mentioned once in this show.
Speaker 2: We'll keep going.
Speaker 3: Yeah, right, and again, none of the book is really compelling.
Speaker 3: If you like this kind of stuff, it's a great read. Again,
Speaker 3: it's free online, the author. The author also has to
Speaker 3: point out that none of this was ever proven in court.
Speaker 3: It's not been acknowledged by the US government. Parts of
Speaker 3: the inconsistencies have been acknowledged. The book came out in
Speaker 3: twenty nineteen, and the author spent twenty five years writing this.
Speaker 3: But is also, to be very clear, is not the
Speaker 3: first person raising these allegations. I don't know Robert Mayhew, though,
Speaker 3: if you were going to cast someone for this conspiracy,
Speaker 3: he's great. He's one of the best picks even though
Speaker 3: I don't know, but he wasn't there. It wasn't he
Speaker 3: was not physically there, right, because he's a professional. Why
Speaker 3: would he be.
Speaker 2: Should you want to? Can we go to the johann
Speaker 2: Edes thing, the connection?
Speaker 4: Yeah?
Speaker 3: Yeah, tell us about Johann Edes.
Speaker 2: Okay, So a person that again Rob Reiner mentioned to
Speaker 2: us and then was mentioned extensively in his show Who
Speaker 2: Killed JFK mentions this guy, George Joannedes, who was quote
Speaker 2: chief of psychological warfare operations and worked extensively with jam Wave,
Speaker 2: which was the CIA's Miami base for this whole secret
Speaker 2: war they had with Castro, right with.
Speaker 3: The producers of things like The Bay of Pigs.
Speaker 2: Yes, and it has been known now that Joe and
Speaker 2: Edes was at the Ambassador Hotel on the day of
Speaker 2: the assassination. Despite Senator Kennedy or Robert Kennedy's distaste for
Speaker 2: CIA activities and his unwillingness to be protected by a
Speaker 2: lot of those official you know, bodyguard are facilitating security
Speaker 2: systems which are like, you know, if you're operating as
Speaker 2: a very high level person, it would be secret service,
Speaker 2: but secret service wasn't available to him at the time.
Speaker 2: It then would have probably been the FBI, and he
Speaker 2: had an ex FBI agent with him, but he didn't
Speaker 2: have any official acting FBI agents with him. And just
Speaker 2: knowing that this guy Joann Edes was there along with
Speaker 2: a couple other people from that same company, same crew,
Speaker 2: it calls into question. I don't know it. For me,
Speaker 2: it's like it's enough to need to be tracked down,
Speaker 2: like we need to know exactly what Joan Edi was
Speaker 2: doing there and where he was and all that other stuff,
Speaker 2: but we just don't have the full details.
Speaker 3: Maybe there's a totally innocuous reason, you know what I mean? Maybe, yeah,
Speaker 3: maybe there is. The point raising is that we don't know.
Speaker 3: And until until we know what that reason is, until
Speaker 3: it can be proven to be innocuous, then yeah, you
Speaker 3: have to put it again in this weird Vin diagram
Speaker 3: of stuff that doesn't prove something. But it doesn't feel right,
Speaker 3: you know, there's something dissonant about it. I don't know.
Speaker 3: They also twenty ten, Sirhun's lawyers argue, what's that what
Speaker 3: was once treated like a wing nut idea? Sirhnen's own
Speaker 3: lawyers in court say, look, the CIA hypnotiz Siirrahan Sirahat.
Speaker 3: They made him an involuntary participant in the assassination. The
Speaker 3: implication there is crazy, first off, because these are professional
Speaker 3: attorneys saying this in court, but secondly because the implication
Speaker 3: is like, why him though? Why him? If there seems
Speaker 3: to be this preponderance of evidence in the weeks leading
Speaker 3: up to it, or indeed the year's leading up to it,
Speaker 3: Why him?
Speaker 4: Why there?
Speaker 3: Right? Did they identify someone struggling with mental issues who
Speaker 3: already had a track record of threats against STARRFK? Did
Speaker 3: they make those threats up? Did they put that did
Speaker 3: they plant that diary? I don't know.
Speaker 4: I mean, it feels like the kind of you know,
Speaker 4: candidate for a patsy or a fall guy that you
Speaker 4: see in other conspiracies as well, you know, whether it
Speaker 4: be pinning, you know, a murder for higher scheme on
Speaker 4: somebody who was sort of like a low hanging fruit
Speaker 4: kind of potential, like maybe low level drug runner or something,
Speaker 4: you know, who could fit the bill, but definitely didn't
Speaker 4: have the kind of motivation that maybe it would be
Speaker 4: made out to seem.
Speaker 2: Cause I think we maybe have talked about this in
Speaker 2: the past, but the route through the kitchen was not
Speaker 2: the planned way to go to exite from the podium
Speaker 2: where he was just speaking.
Speaker 3: It was a last minute switch.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and he was just told that by one of
Speaker 2: those athletes that was acting as a security team. I
Speaker 2: don't know. There's something about about changing a walking route
Speaker 2: like last minute that for me, compromises RFK security in
Speaker 2: that moment, which means if you were aware that that
Speaker 2: was going to happen, or if you caused that route
Speaker 2: change to happen, you could have somebody planted there and
Speaker 2: it I don't know, there's something to that that feels
Speaker 2: so important to me.
Speaker 3: There's also a counterpoint. There's another side to that point,
Speaker 3: which is that it's not uncommon for those last minute
Speaker 3: switches to occur. If you feel like your established route,
Speaker 3: like if you've already signaled that and messaged that out
Speaker 3: and you're worried about possible danger or shenanigans, then there
Speaker 3: are completely good and smart reasons to change the path
Speaker 3: at the last minute to keep them guessing, which is
Speaker 3: sort of why you don't see I mean, you see
Speaker 3: it all the time with VIPs, not even necessarily heads
Speaker 3: of state, but you can see it with celebrities, right,
Speaker 3: especially if they have ardent stalkery fans.
Speaker 2: I think you're right if they made it public, right,
Speaker 2: or if you made it even public to like staff
Speaker 2: at the hotel rather than just your internal security staff.
Speaker 3: Someone found out, right. It could be as simple as sliding,
Speaker 3: you know, sliding one hundred to someone at the front
Speaker 3: desk who happens to know the established route, or you know,
Speaker 3: a place like the Ambassador Hotel also is home to VIPs,
Speaker 3: and so in these fancy hotels there are often and
Speaker 3: if you go to the right hotel, folks, trust me,
Speaker 3: there are protocols in place, and you can see those protocols,
Speaker 3: but they lose they lose value with every new person
Speaker 3: that is aware of them.
Speaker 4: Well, because they're unspoken and like, you don't wanna, you
Speaker 4: don't want to overplay that hand, and it kind of
Speaker 4: dilutes the whole, you know, kind of secrecy of it all.
Speaker 4: And then I guess it hasn't requires a shift in.
Speaker 3: Protocol, right, Yeah, And the thing we're quarreling with here
Speaker 3: is it's again it's another great unknown. Where did they
Speaker 3: decide proactively to change the route on their own due
Speaker 3: to concerns or were they pushed into that? Were they
Speaker 3: decision treed into walking through the kitchen and perhaps even
Speaker 3: thinking that was their own idea. All of these are possible,
Speaker 3: none of them are proven. Uh, and it's tantalizing, but
Speaker 3: it's torturous. I mean, look, none of all of this,
Speaker 3: which is bothersome, none of it is. Forgive us for
Speaker 3: saying so smoking gun level evidence of anything. But there's
Speaker 3: a lot of unusual stuff already. We haven't even gotten
Speaker 3: to even weirder things yet. No, So these earlier authors,
Speaker 3: these researchers conclude that they seem to conclude that Siahan
Speaker 3: did not himself kill Kennedy, or if he was the killer,
Speaker 3: that he was a lot more like a bullet than
Speaker 3: an assassin. Right he would The argument is he was
Speaker 3: made to do so. And they also say that the
Speaker 3: LAPD and the district attorney at the time were either
Speaker 3: crooked or incompetent, and maybe his defense lawyers were crooked
Speaker 3: or incompetent because they didn't challenge any of the physical evidence,
Speaker 3: and the physical evidence marri way falls not as ironclad
Speaker 3: as perhaps prosecution made it out to be. Is that
Speaker 3: fair to say that's not?
Speaker 2: Like?
Speaker 4: Take there, I think it is.
Speaker 2: I think they're just weird. There's other weird stuff that
Speaker 2: was going on. Most of it came out after the trial.
Speaker 3: Way after the trial, Yeah, because they wanted to shut
Speaker 3: this down. The US at the time was already already
Speaker 3: had some threats to the status quo as the elite
Speaker 3: saw it, right, widespread anti war activism, civil rights movement,
Speaker 3: some secessionist movements like American Indian Movement, all this kind
Speaker 3: of stuff. So it is in their interest to try
Speaker 3: to nip something in the bud, make the story look right,
Speaker 3: and move on as quickly as possible. The problem is
Speaker 3: the stuff that comes out afterwards, like the autopsy findings,
Speaker 3: right that Kennedy must have been shot at close range,
Speaker 3: that somehow got shot in the back of the head. Yeah,
Speaker 3: you don't have to be a gun nut to know that.
Speaker 3: If you're shooting at someone from the front, it's really
Speaker 3: tough to hit them in the back of.
Speaker 2: That well, unless they turn their head right as being
Speaker 2: fired towards them.
Speaker 3: And to the left.
Speaker 4: Yeah, as a magic bullet.
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 2: Well, well no, but really, like if you're in a
Speaker 2: situation and somebody in front of you or to your
Speaker 2: side is firing a gun at you, a little twenty
Speaker 2: two let you say a little Iiver Johnson twenty two revolver,
Speaker 2: but it's not. It would sound loud and it would
Speaker 2: be scary. You would probably turn away right, which then
Speaker 2: a bullet could hit the back of your head. That's
Speaker 2: what was argued.
Speaker 3: Or if somebody says watch out, depending on where they're
Speaker 3: standing and turned to look at them, Yep, possible, possible.
Speaker 3: Yet we also have to take tough. But the distance
Speaker 3: is what we have to think about. Don't forget about
Speaker 3: the distance because numerous eyewitnesses at the shooting, and I wouldn't. Yes,
Speaker 3: we get eyewitness reports are sticky infallible, but numerous people
Speaker 3: confirmed multiple times over time that Sir Had was not
Speaker 3: close enough to fire at close range and that he
Speaker 3: only got two shots out in Kennedy's direction before he
Speaker 3: is getting held and tackled to the ground. And as
Speaker 3: he's going down, he's just shooting wildly. He's spraying the
Speaker 3: rest of the rest of his bullets, just out, go
Speaker 3: with God style, And that's what tackled and dealt with basically, right,
Speaker 3: I can explain. And his pistol had eight shots in it.
Speaker 3: The earlier said revolvers that might think you had that
Speaker 3: might sound like it had six shots. Right, No, this
Speaker 3: is a twenty two caliber with eight bullets in it,
Speaker 3: which will be important later. But I don't know, do
Speaker 3: you guys? Right now, before you get any weirder stuff,
Speaker 3: is it possible that Sirhan Sirhan could have been manipulated
Speaker 3: by someone? Did he act on his own?
Speaker 2: Well? Yeah, but before we see that, Ben, there was
Speaker 2: somebody with a gun standing right behind RFK when this
Speaker 2: went down.
Speaker 3: Yes, yeah, we'll get to him as well, Fane.
Speaker 2: Right, there's somebody that has a gun who is holding
Speaker 2: Rfk's arm as he's walking through the kitchen. I don't know, Okay,
Speaker 2: whatever is.
Speaker 4: This the theory of like Sirhan Sirhan as distraction as
Speaker 4: diversion while somebody else does the deed.
Speaker 2: That's the theory, that's the possibility.
Speaker 3: Let's go into the drugs too on the way to that,
Speaker 3: because that's hypnosis and drugs. That's where That's what prompted
Speaker 3: us to kind of re explore this. We talked about
Speaker 3: a Manchurion candidate before over the years. Right, it comes
Speaker 3: from a fiction novel. Right, it's not like a super
Speaker 3: secret real Soviet program, but in this novel, a son
Speaker 3: of a political dynasty is brainwashed into becoming an assassin
Speaker 3: for the community.
Speaker 4: And this is not the same as say a sleeper agent,
Speaker 4: where I think a lot of people kind of misconstrue
Speaker 4: those concepts where someone is deployed as like a basic
Speaker 4: you know, civilian, and then you know, whenever they're given
Speaker 4: a particular order or code word or whatever, they are
Speaker 4: activated and then they carry out these instructions. This is
Speaker 4: much deeper. This is someone who is given a code
Speaker 4: word that all of a sudden switches their brain and
Speaker 4: makes them into a killing automaton of sorts.
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 2: Oh, yeah, and let's jump into that guys. After another
Speaker 2: word from our sponsor, we'll be right back.
Speaker 3: We've returned. Yeah, that's an important differentiation, NOL. So if
Speaker 3: you have seen shows like The Americans, which is loosely
Speaker 3: based on real events, then you'll know that sleeper agents
Speaker 3: can be a real thing and exist as to all
Speaker 3: intents and purposes. They exist as citizens of the country
Speaker 3: in which they're operating until they get their signal, their directives,
Speaker 3: et cetera. The idea of a Manchurian candidate are argues
Speaker 3: that subconscious demands have been embedded into your psyche. You
Speaker 3: are a sleeper agent, but you are not aware you
Speaker 3: are a sleeper agent until you get that code word.
Speaker 3: You know, someone runs up to you, shows you a
Speaker 3: picture of a white elephant and says shah mahlamading dong
Speaker 3: and then you're like, hello, en up nukes.
Speaker 4: And presumably the idea here in theory is that this
Speaker 4: is the deepest level of deniability for the handlers of
Speaker 4: this individual or for the people that are actually using
Speaker 4: them as a weapon, because I mean, even with the
Speaker 4: sleeper agent, you could get information out of that person,
Speaker 4: you could potentially figure out who they are answering to,
Speaker 4: whereas with a Manchurian candidate, they don't know who they're
Speaker 4: answering to. There they literally you can't get anything out
Speaker 4: of them because it's not there for them to give and.
Speaker 3: It might not Yeah, that's a great point. Might not
Speaker 3: also go to the extreme of murder. The idea or
Speaker 3: this theory says that maybe you could have someone who
Speaker 3: is induced to give over sensitive information right just because
Speaker 3: they're you know, a top level defense engineer. But there's also,
Speaker 3: as we gain it through, there's something else interesting about
Speaker 3: the idea of deniability. So if there's a Manchurian candidate,
Speaker 3: and it's operating purely on trigger words, right, casting a
Speaker 3: spell for lack of a better word, or like a
Speaker 3: visual series of visual accues, or even old factory stuff.
Speaker 3: You as the person orchestrating this Shenanigan, you don't have
Speaker 3: to present them the trigger yourself. You can just pay
Speaker 3: somebody without who has no idea what's going on. You
Speaker 3: can pay them and say, look, I gave fifty bucks.
Speaker 3: You see that guy over there, or you know two
Speaker 3: days there's going to be this guy over here. I
Speaker 3: want you to hold up this picture of what's an
Speaker 3: unusual animal, a zebra. I want you to hold up
Speaker 3: this picture of a zebra I don't know, and then
Speaker 3: and then I want you to slowly turn it upside
Speaker 3: down and counterclockwise. Yeah.
Speaker 2: Or you plant somebody wearing a polka dot dress that
Speaker 2: it walks by and says something, or just you know,
Speaker 2: makes a gesture that is the trigger.
Speaker 3: Right exactly. There are a million ways you could do
Speaker 3: it in this theory. There's never been a proving case
Speaker 3: of a man sure an actual Mentorian candidate in the
Speaker 3: real world, and that's because the problem goes to timeframe right.
Speaker 3: A lot of this goes to distance and time. So
Speaker 3: you can hypnotize someone and can give them trance state suggestions,
Speaker 3: but hypnosis is not going to make people do stuff
Speaker 3: they would not ordinarily do.
Speaker 4: Well, and it's not going to necessary. Again, we don't know.
Speaker 4: There's a lot we don't know about how hypnosis works,
Speaker 4: and you know, certain people are more susceptible to it
Speaker 4: than others. But it does kind of beg credulity to
Speaker 4: think that you could implant something that would just lay
Speaker 4: dormant indefinitely, right, I don't know it.
Speaker 3: It's a little bit of hard to swallow for me
Speaker 3: without continual maintenance, Without continual maintenance.
Speaker 2: Even if you're dosing someone with LSD, right with an
Speaker 2: MK ultra style experiment, if that person is in an
Speaker 2: LSD and you know, affected state, and you're telling them
Speaker 2: things like RFK must die, you're repeating it over and
Speaker 2: over and over and over and over in that state
Speaker 2: while you're watching maybe film of the man's face and
Speaker 2: death and all this stuff. These the conjured imaginations that
Speaker 2: appear in fictional stories. Right, Even if you're doing that,
Speaker 2: how does the human being not recall any of those
Speaker 2: images or moments or just the very fine memories that
Speaker 2: could occur.
Speaker 3: There, Right, How can you embed it deeply enough into
Speaker 3: the psychic soil or the neurologicals.
Speaker 4: Without having other byproducts that people would remember? You think
Speaker 4: you'd remember getting strapped to a chair with lidlocks on
Speaker 4: and being forced to watch these films? Well, you know,
Speaker 4: I mean you can't. We don't have the selectivity in
Speaker 4: how we can mess with people's memories. It's kind of
Speaker 4: to pick and choose.
Speaker 2: I don't think.
Speaker 3: Well yet, we're getting there.
Speaker 2: We stumbled on something just randomly in our last conversation
Speaker 2: that that's why we're doing this, right.
Speaker 3: Yeah, So I like that we're pointing this out to
Speaker 3: fiction versus fact. So another example of this is chloroform
Speaker 3: is often portrayed as this sort of super spy knockout things, right, yeah,
Speaker 3: But the reality is you have to keep applying chloroform
Speaker 3: to keep someone knocked out if you Yeah, and.
Speaker 2: You can kill someone pretty easily.
Speaker 4: You could kill them.
Speaker 3: Pretty easily too, So if you take the rag off
Speaker 3: of their face, they're going to get up and they're
Speaker 3: gonna be pissed at you, So be very very you
Speaker 3: know what. Actually, let's I hope this is not a
Speaker 3: hot take. Your life is your own, but try to
Speaker 3: avoid situations where you feel like you have to chloroform people.
Speaker 4: Yeah, at the very least get some sort of dart
Speaker 4: you know, gun situation with like a much longer acting
Speaker 4: sedative sedatives.
Speaker 2: There was a recent story, you guys, this guy there's
Speaker 2: an Elvis impersonator that was allegedly killed by someone via
Speaker 2: chloroform during a sexual encounter. You can read about it
Speaker 2: in the New York Post search for New York Elvis
Speaker 2: impersonator allegedly killed after being chloroformed during sexual encounter.
Speaker 4: Are people using chloroform like poppers like aminyl nitrate.
Speaker 2: Or some people?
Speaker 3: Get down man, they'd do it.
Speaker 4: Yeah, well, what you do in the bedroom is your home,
Speaker 4: but be careful, don't go too heavy on the chloroform, guys.
Speaker 3: Right, Consent and safety are keys. And there's okay, So
Speaker 3: there's the other question. All right, we know the problem
Speaker 3: with the Manchurian candidate deployment in the real world is
Speaker 3: the time frame issue. But what if you could get
Speaker 3: around the time frame entirely. What if you just drugged
Speaker 3: the right person on the scene directly before you needed
Speaker 3: an action, and then you set them loose disturbingly enough.
Speaker 3: And this is what Matt was alluding to. We know
Speaker 3: with certitude that certain drugs can and do that. The
Speaker 3: torah aka Jims and Wei is being deployed by criminals
Speaker 3: throughout South America to do this very thing, as we
Speaker 3: record right now, as you hear.
Speaker 2: This scopelamine, it's the thing that what was a devil's breath,
Speaker 2: it's the thing that's what it can get blown in
Speaker 2: your face. Then you are immediately a compliant automaton, essentially
Speaker 2: with no memory of what's happening. Nogamed.
Speaker 3: It could be put on the tip of a cigarette.
Speaker 3: It doesn't take much.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and you could literally you could literally make a suggestion.
Speaker 2: You blow the thing. You make a suggestion. It's like
Speaker 2: shoot RFK right, somebody even hands you a pistol, or
Speaker 2: maybe you've already got a pistol. Uh. It's just it's
Speaker 2: crazy that it I think it may actually work.
Speaker 4: It would.
Speaker 3: We know that it's worked in criminal cases. We know
Speaker 3: that the effects are immedia. It's tasteless, it's odorless, it's
Speaker 3: it's it's tough to find it if you're an investigator
Speaker 3: and you don't know what you're looking for the results
Speaker 3: of being poisoned. This way, we know that people will
Speaker 3: be tremendously compliant. They will go to their ATM and
Speaker 3: empty it out. They'll come to you hours later with
Speaker 3: vague memories of helping criminals move the furniture from their houses.
Speaker 3: This is nasty stuff. Check out our Drugs as Weapons episode,
Speaker 3: and the lead toxicologist or the lead world expert I
Speaker 3: should say on this, they agree that, unlike hypnosis, exposure
Speaker 3: to these drugs can make you do stuff that you
Speaker 3: would not ordinarily do. So this is if Sara Han
Speaker 3: was under the influence of something like that, he would
Speaker 3: have also been extremely compliant to suggestion throughout the interrogation process,
Speaker 3: so long as it happened shortly after ingestion. And this
Speaker 3: stuff can last like twenty four hours more.
Speaker 2: Dude. And they said he was calm, right, but he
Speaker 2: wasn't of his own mind. He was like, like, I'm
Speaker 2: just imagining. I have not seen anyone under the effects
Speaker 2: of detura scope lamine or whatever, but I imagine someone
Speaker 2: who is just compliant and looks normal. Maybe you might
Speaker 2: think that he would be he would appear more intoxicated
Speaker 2: because he was drinking. Tom Collins he had like several
Speaker 2: Tom Collins drinks while he was there at the Ambassador Hotel,
Speaker 2: at least according to the official story, which you could
Speaker 2: slip something in his drink while he's there at the bar.
Speaker 3: You could slip something in his drink and have a
Speaker 3: brief conversation. Oh my, coming right. I mean, there are
Speaker 3: a thousand ways to get to people with this stuff.
Speaker 3: Be safe, keep an eye on your drinks and joan edies.
Speaker 2: Again, the chief of psychological warfare operations was hanging out
Speaker 2: at the hotel.
Speaker 3: For possibly innocuous reasons.
Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, yeah, that we have to say.
Speaker 3: Yeah, there's also this other thing. I mean, you do
Speaker 3: have to note the next part. The reason that the
Speaker 3: check secretly stopped using scopolamine, the reason that so like
Speaker 3: even the Nazis gave it up, is because it was
Speaker 3: terrible as a truth seraha was terrible for suggestions and confessions,
Speaker 3: because people under the influence of that will confess to
Speaker 3: anything their interrogator suggests, even if it's impossible, like hey,
Speaker 3: do you have a tail, And they're like, oh, yeah,
Speaker 3: I haven't checked recently, but I probably do, you know
Speaker 3: what I mean? Like that to that level of absurdity,
Speaker 3: because they also do anything that suggested up to it,
Speaker 3: in including killing someone. If that is Sirahan Sarahan had
Speaker 3: actual bullets in his gun and not blanks. Paul, can
Speaker 3: we get a record scratch?
Speaker 2: I haven't heard this one.
Speaker 3: So what if Sirrahan Sarahan was handed like going back
Speaker 3: to the distraction second gunman theory, what if it was
Speaker 3: handed a twenty two caliber pistol but it had blanks
Speaker 3: in it and he was just functioning as a distraction.
Speaker 4: This is yeah, Anna Patsy, right, I mean, yeah, like
Speaker 4: a fall guy.
Speaker 2: But wait, what because there I guess it depends on
Speaker 2: what you what evidence you believe. But in the ballistics
Speaker 2: there were twenty two rounds found, like embedded into the
Speaker 2: walls in like a door frame.
Speaker 4: Wait, but from other people firing right at Sirhan.
Speaker 2: Now the trajectory, the trajectory from some of them were
Speaker 2: Sirhan firing but he only had eight.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and people would also we'll get to people also
Speaker 3: claim they are thirteen gunshots later. But anyway, so the
Speaker 3: in a lie too big to fail. Peace quotes eyewitnesses
Speaker 3: saying they saw I'm not sure how I feel about
Speaker 3: the shredded paper fluttering through the air as Siahan was firing,
Speaker 3: and that was indicative of ca scenes containing explosive charges,
Speaker 3: but no actual bullets. I don't know. Again, eyewitnesses are imperfect,
Speaker 3: and to remember shredded paper through the air. While that
Speaker 3: may be true, that might not have anything to do
Speaker 3: with the gunshots.
Speaker 4: Pretty circumstantial, right, Yeah.
Speaker 3: That's a good word for it. And then there were
Speaker 3: other people who were strapped at this time. There were
Speaker 3: armed men around behind Kennedy. One of the guys confirmed
Speaker 3: to be present and armed was a security guard named
Speaker 3: Fane Caesar aka Jeene Caesar, and he had previously done
Speaker 3: some work in Los Angeles with a guy named Robert May.
Speaker 3: It was not the kind of work that gives you
Speaker 3: a four oh one.
Speaker 2: K And you may also see his name written as
Speaker 2: Eugene Fane Caesar, but he has been described as holding
Speaker 2: on to Robert Kennedy's arm, kind of leading him through
Speaker 2: the kitchen while he is armed. And then what did
Speaker 2: we talk about the bullet back of the head situation.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and he actually talks with Caesar, spoke on record
Speaker 3: to researchers about this, and there was one interview he
Speaker 3: had with an author named Dan Muldia, and he said, quote,
Speaker 3: there are dozens of articles that come out saying I
Speaker 3: carried a second gun that possibly could have been the
Speaker 3: person who shot Bobby Kennedy because and this Caesar speaking,
Speaker 3: because the bullet entered the back of his head. However,
Speaker 3: to be clear, Caesar is always denied any kind of implication.
Speaker 3: He passed away recently in the Philippines where he retired,
Speaker 3: And there's nothing wrong with retiring abroad. I feel like
Speaker 3: I made that sound like such a bread crumb, But
Speaker 3: there's nothing wrong with retiring abroad. People go to Costa
Speaker 3: Rica all the time or whatever. But if we bring
Speaker 3: it all together, then the alternative narrative is something quite strange.
Speaker 3: A world in which Sirhan Sirhan is also a victim
Speaker 3: hypnotized or drug somehow compelled to appear to murder RFG,
Speaker 3: while behind the scenes a shadowy cabal orchestrates the actual hit.
Speaker 3: Not very straightforward. It's a little mouse trappy, isn't it. Uh?
Speaker 2: The little Yeah. This is complicated as all heck, unless
Speaker 2: there was again, like we talked about it in the past,
Speaker 2: when you've got that uncertainty thing you everybody tries to
Speaker 2: throw darts to be like, oh, man, well maybe that's it. Well,
Speaker 2: maybe that's it. Maybe this is the connection. Maybe that's
Speaker 2: the thing, and you'll will do it forever until we
Speaker 2: get some certainty or some truth. If somebody comes out
Speaker 2: and just says blatantly, hey, here's what's going on.
Speaker 4: But do we have like a real reason why the
Speaker 4: government would want to collude to assassinate Robert Kennedy? Is
Speaker 4: it like finishing the job of what they supposedly were
Speaker 4: doing when they colluded to assassinate J F. Kennedy? Are
Speaker 4: these these connected, like, well, where's the threat? I guess
Speaker 4: I've never fully wrapped my head around that aspect of it.
Speaker 3: The argument would be that factions of the government, most
Speaker 3: notably factions in domestic and foreign intelligence agencies like the
Speaker 3: CIA and the FBI, wanted to continue functioning without oversight
Speaker 3: and saw JFK in particular and RFK as well as
Speaker 3: threats to their operations. That's the idea that has not
Speaker 3: been officially recognized in any court, but it's something I
Speaker 3: think a slim majority of Americans still believe, at least
Speaker 3: here in the here in the US you know where
Speaker 3: you five. Most of the Americans anyway. I don't know either.
Speaker 3: But I do have one question that isn't brought up
Speaker 3: enough in the literature here. It's this, where was Bigfoot?
Speaker 3: There's there's no documentary record of Bigfoot, has no alibi
Speaker 3: for this.
Speaker 4: Can he fire a gun?
Speaker 3: Right?
Speaker 5: I mean thick fingers of his I'm having fun with this,
Speaker 5: but yeah, if you have, if you have proof of
Speaker 5: bigfoots whereabouts nineteen sixty eight, tell us, because that'll also
Speaker 5: prove that Bigfoot is real.
Speaker 3: But it descends into this level of speculation. There's still
Speaker 3: there is hard evidence of discrepancy. Sirahn's gun held only
Speaker 3: eight bullets. Someone else was firing, right. We just don't
Speaker 3: know the context.
Speaker 4: It does feel at the same level of weirdness as
Speaker 4: what surrounded JFK's assassination. We know something fishy was going
Speaker 4: on there, especially with now we've got this whole the
Speaker 4: magic bullet theory kind of solved by that that CIA
Speaker 4: agent who came out and said he found this other
Speaker 4: bullet lodged, you know, in the in the seat and
Speaker 4: didn't talk about it for years. That and of itself
Speaker 4: is weird, but what a strange thing to have the
Speaker 4: literal relative of this highest profile assassination of a public figure,
Speaker 4: probably in the history of the world, with with the
Speaker 4: most questions around it, leading to equal numbers of questions
Speaker 4: and having equal amounts of suspicious details the.
Speaker 3: Court had to answer to. The court eventually had to
Speaker 3: respond to something they had originally dismissed as hogwash. They
Speaker 3: had to respond to the second shooter allegations. So Sirhan Sirhan,
Speaker 3: after rest, after trial, after conviction, makes multiple appeals, as
Speaker 3: many appeals as possible, and in one of the rejections
Speaker 3: of those appeals, a magistrate judge named Andrew J. Wistrich said,
Speaker 3: I don't love this, but the judge said, maybe there
Speaker 3: was a second shooter. It doesn't matter. Quote even if
Speaker 3: the second shooter's bullet was the one that killed Senator Kennedy,
Speaker 3: Siirhan would still be liable for murder as an aider
Speaker 3: and a better Yeah, convenient says like, remember that thing
Speaker 3: we said was a conspiracy. Well, even if it's true, whatever.
Speaker 2: Move on, guys, that's crazy.
Speaker 3: But they also note h the idea of a second
Speaker 3: gunman shooting Kennedy a close range with the same type
Speaker 3: of gun and same ammunition as sir Han also escaping
Speaker 3: a crowded room without notice in a room full of witnesses.
Speaker 3: Say it lacks any evidentiary support, But I don't know.
Speaker 3: I feel like in that kind of chaos, it's kind
Speaker 3: of easy to do. What irish goodbye?
Speaker 2: Like, just get the heck out of there?
Speaker 4: Ghost.
Speaker 3: Yeah, no, if you're not you know, a prominent member
Speaker 3: of the thing, you know well.
Speaker 4: And what of the idea of whether or not sear
Speaker 4: Hand was actively colluding with another shooter and it was
Speaker 4: aware of his or her or their presence. That's another
Speaker 4: thing that's been dismissed as doesn't matter.
Speaker 3: Right yet, he said, and he again says now, And
Speaker 3: for some time he's maintained that his memory of the
Speaker 3: events is fuzzier, nonexistent in a way that perhaps coincidentally
Speaker 3: jibes with de Toro poisoning. Be quite honest with you,
Speaker 3: that does it? Again not proven, We don't know. But
Speaker 3: there are a lot of pieces here where you can.
Speaker 3: You can already see, folks, how easy it is to
Speaker 3: string that red thread along from point to point. Sirhan
Speaker 3: recently lost his seventeenth parole hearing on March first, twenty
Speaker 3: twenty three, and he got really close this time, but
Speaker 3: it was shut down, and as we record today it's
Speaker 3: April nineteenth, twenty twenty four. He is eighty years old.
Speaker 3: He is alive, like most people in their eighties, he
Speaker 3: is not in the best of health. To all official
Speaker 3: accounts and conclusion, he is served in life for a successful,
Speaker 3: high profile, politically motivated assassination.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Well, let's just note here that one of the reasons,
Speaker 2: at least one of the large reasons that his parole
Speaker 2: was denied for the seventeenth time back in March was
Speaker 2: because of the words of rfk's son, Christopher Kennedy. I
Speaker 2: just wanted to read just a couple of the things
Speaker 2: that he said, because I think it strikes at the
Speaker 2: heart of why, at least the Kennedy family parts of it,
Speaker 2: want him to stay in prison forever. But it also
Speaker 2: points to I think a larger like a larger statement
Speaker 2: about conspiracy theories and why they form. I really like
Speaker 2: these words. These are the words of Christopher Kennedy speaking
Speaker 2: against the being granted parole siance here and being granted pearl.
Speaker 2: He says, quote, this is a man who has never
Speaker 2: admitted to killing my father, never said he was sorry
Speaker 2: for having ended his life, he's refused truth, thereby forfeiting reconciliation.
Speaker 2: His repeated denial of his crimes have been devastating. His
Speaker 2: lack of remorse soul crushing. And this is the important
Speaker 2: part here. We don't want vengeance, we want justice. We
Speaker 2: want to offer forgiveness, but we need to see repentance.
Speaker 2: It's the oldest bargain in history. One side admits and
Speaker 2: the other side forgives. One side offers truth and the
Speaker 2: other side offers reconciliation. Basically saying that if Sirhan Syirhan
Speaker 2: came forward and said, yes, I killed your father and
Speaker 2: I'm terribly sorry that I did that. I can't believe
Speaker 2: I did that that kind of thing, then I guess
Speaker 2: Christopher Kennedy and others in his family would forgive him
Speaker 2: and say, Okay, this man needs pearled, but he hasn't
Speaker 2: done that. But if Sirhan Syirhan wasn't actually the person
Speaker 2: that killed Robert Kennedy, then how do you go about,
Speaker 2: you know, offering that it's just a sticky situation. And
Speaker 2: I do think that whole it goes back to the statement, Ben,
Speaker 2: what do you always say about when there's murkiness?
Speaker 3: In the absence of transparency, speculation thrives.
Speaker 2: I think it goes right back to that man.
Speaker 3: And yeah, you know, Richard is agreeing with again, to
Speaker 3: be fair, the majority of the world, majority of public opinion,
Speaker 3: but to others, a persistent group of questions. Sarah and
Speaker 3: Sarad is one of the last pieces of a multi
Speaker 3: decade conspiracy, living evidence of something whoever they are, something
Speaker 3: they don't want you to know. And you know, we're
Speaker 3: Indie with a question here too. I think we came
Speaker 3: with some great recommendations if you want to read more,
Speaker 3: if you want to learn more about this specific instance,
Speaker 3: this period in time. There are some great podcasts out there.
Speaker 3: We can say it because we didn't make all of them,
Speaker 3: but there are some fantastic things out there, and we'd
Speaker 3: love to hear your thoughts, folks, especially if you were
Speaker 3: around when this occurred. If you happen to have any
Speaker 3: or involvement, or you have a different take, let us know.
Speaker 3: We try to be easy to find online.
Speaker 4: It's right. You can find us at the handle of
Speaker 4: Conspiracy Stuff, where we exist, on Facebook, where we have
Speaker 4: our Facebook group Here's where it gets crazy. On YouTube,
Speaker 4: where we roll out new video content. Every week, George
Speaker 4: Washington continues his time travel adventures in Hollywood, and in
Speaker 4: this week's installment, he discovers the Deadly Escalator. We also
Speaker 4: exist at that handle on x FKA, Twitter, on Instagram,
Speaker 4: and TikTok or Conspiracy Stuff Show.
Speaker 2: Hey, would you like to say something with your mouth?
Speaker 2: Call one eight three three STDWYTK. That's our voicemail system.
Speaker 2: When you call in, give yourself a cool nickname and
Speaker 2: let us know if we can use your name and
Speaker 2: message on the air. You've got three minutes again, see
Speaker 2: whatever you'd like. If you've got more to say it
Speaker 2: and can fit in that voicemail message, why not instead
Speaker 2: send us a good old fashioned email.
Speaker 3: We are conspiracy at iHeartRadio dot com.
Speaker 2: Stuff they Don't want you to Know is a production
Speaker 2: of iHeartRadio. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app,
Speaker 2: Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.