My responses are in red.
Stan and Charles. Having read the complete LAPD investigation files of the RFK murder and then the complete FBI files, the suspect is a ringer for Sirhan. That much is certain. Back then if you wanted a job in the kitchen of the major LA hotels you had to go first to the union. The union would then send you back to the hotel for hiring. The union man in charge of hiring told the LAPD that Sirhan Sirhan tried to get a job in the kitchen of the Ambassador Hotel a week or two before the murder. One reason he remembered was because of Sirhan's obnoxious behavior. There is nothing in the investigation files indicating Sirhan ever tried getting a job at the hotel. So either Sirhan did try and get job there or the person the union man interviewed and declined to hire is a very close look a like. A campaign worker in the Azuza CA, campaign headquarters says Sirhan came into the building inquiring about the Kennedy campaign. Azuza is down the road from Pasadena, CA, where Sirhan lived. On her third interview she mentions the bad case of acne Sirhan had. I called Munir, Sirhan's brother, and asked if Sirhan ever had acne. Munir told me none of the brothers had acne as they are middle eastern. The night of the murder at the hotel in the Embassy Room a woman was charmed by "Sirhan" She picked out his photo. But she also said "Sirhan" had an old case of acne and was a little lighter skinned than the Sirhan showed to her by the LAPD. 11:30 p.m., thirty minutes before RFK came down for his speech, a young woman is walking through the pantry. She notices a young man leaning casually against a wall. He is dressed in the button up dress shirt as the kitchen help and assumed he was kitchen help. She said to him. "Don't work to hard." He smiled. She insisted he was Sirhan. In my opinion, this will be the man who is shooting RFK from behind as the real Sirhan is coming from the front. Is that enough detail for you Charles?
Yes and no. As the progenitor of the "Doppelganger Gambit" hypothesis in which I enumerate and propose multiple functions for the multiple instances of "doubles" (or "triples," or "quadruples" ...) in intel operations in general and the Kennedy hits in particular, I find your "two Sirhan" analysis to be spot-on.
By the same token, I find your "opinion" regarding the use of the Sirhan doppelganger as a shooter to be intriguing but problematic and ultimately unconvincing. Placing doubles within immediate proximity of each other during the execution phase of the conspiracy in question presents -- appropriately enough -- as a double-edged sword. Two of the objectives of the Doppelganger Gambit as I envision it are to sow confusion (or, as I prefer, cognitive dissonance) among pre-hit witnesses and generate conflicting testimonies that mislead and ultimately discourage investigators. But to my knowledge, there aren't any witnesses who place Sirhan -- either one of them -- behind RFK.
After all, isn't the very foundation of the finding of conspiracy in this case the oft-repeated and all but universally acknowledged fact that no one ever saw Sirhan to the rear of his target?
And wouldn't reports of seeing multiple Sirhans during the shooting give away the game?
There would have been far more effective operational uses of such a doppelganger at The Ambassador that night.
So if you have more than an opinion to offer on this matter, please do so. In detail, if you will.
Apparently the shooter did get placed in the kitchen as a worker and the reason was so he wouldn't be kicked out the night of the murder. It also afforded him time to rehearse the shooting in the week leading up to it. And possibly recruit a couple of Mexican bus boys as co conspirators.
Do we have any on-the-record witnesses who report such a rehearsal? How would this rehearsal be structured? Can you point to any conspiratorial actions by "a couple of Mexican bus boys"?
To this writer of dramatic fiction, you seem to be offering elements of a "pitch" for a screenplay -- one that would compel industry interest. But there's no hard scholarship evident to support these suppositions as anything else. And by the way, I am a passionate proponent of the application of creative thinking and artistic sensibility to the study of historical events. But when doing so we must be disciplined in finding balance and context for such material.
Thane Cesar is there to insure Sirhan's admittance into the pantry. If Sirhan is prevented from entering the pantry there is no fall guy. Thane Cesar was placed guarding the door to the pantry from the Embassy Room entrance at 11:30 p.m. by the director of security for the hotel.
Someone on the scene must have been charged with the responsibilities you ascribe to Cesar. This makes sense to me. But this functionary need not have been Cesar, whose primary role in the operation (at least within my own hypothesis) was to serve as a second patsy. If such were the case, it would not be unprecedented.
I have an interview report from a girl who was there that Sirhan was removed from the pantry earlier at the request of a campaign worker to the security guard, but when Sirhan reentered the pantry, when the worker once again requested Sirhan's removal, the security guard refused saying he had given Sirhan permission to be there. The timing is such that the security guard would have been Thane Cesar. Is that detail enough for you Charles?
Yes and no.
Cesar accompanies RFK into the pantry trying to hold onto to Kennedy's arm in order to hold Kennedy in place while being shot. The shooter fired right over and behind Cesar into the back of RFK's head and twice more to his back. Cesar hit the deck upon hearing the shots which is what he was probably told to do before hand so as not to get shot himself.
Pure if compelling supposition with which I have but one problem -- as long as it is presented as, if you will, a highly educated guess.
Said problem is the notion of the shooter firing "right over and behind Cesar." Why wasn't so obvious a posture noted by witnesses? How long would the assassin's reach have to be in your scenario in order to place the weapon at near-contact range to RFK's head?
Is Reed Richards one of your suspects?
Not nearly enough detail here, Michael.
The site for the murder has been picked by CIA as well as the method.
I simply will not entertain your "CIA"-did-it sermon until you address the questions and issues I've previously raised. Where do you place "CIA" in the conspiracy model presenting Sponsors, Facilitators, and Mechanics?
Your use of language remains fatally vague. "CIA" is an institution. Who within it do you claim killed JFK? Was "POTUS Assassination" an agenda item on a secret meeting agenda from the DCI? I mean no disrespect, but it is very difficult to lend credence to your work in its entirety when this sort of intellectual sloppiness -- or, to keep with the theme of this exchange, lack of detail -- recurs with such frequency.
But none of it matters if you can't bring Kennedy into the kill zone. That's where CIA needs some assistance.
Simplistic speculation unsupported by scholarship, logic, or fact. See above.
The job of the advance men is to move the candidate around. Everywhere. At the airport, the hotel, into and out of buildings for speeches, which hotel room to stay at, everything considering a candidate's movements. Jerry Bruno is the head advance man for the RFK campaign. CIA is depending on Bruno to bring their victim to them. CIA cannot bring in Sirhan, the polka dot dress girl, the real shooter and a CIA team to make sure he escapes the hotel, have this team waiting, unless certain the target is on his way to them. The advance men will insure this. So Jerry Bruno was brought on board by CIA. For added measure, CIA got their own deep cover agent in the campaign and to be there the night of the murder. This is Gary Dotterman.
Here is the perfect example of how your "CIA"-did-it crusade casts serious doubt on the scholarship and reasoning behind the rest of your conclusions. As a matter of fact I share your suspicions regarding Bruno. As a seasoned and respected analyst of deep political phenomena, I am capable of separating your wheat from your chaff. But as such, I am in the tiny minority of honorable JFK assassination researchers.
Hired by Jerry Bruno just days before the murder, Dotterman arrives in Los Angeles that weekend. Unknown what function he did on the last day of campaigning, Monday, but he has been Introduced by Bruno to RFK as an advance man. Tuesday night at midnight I've seen video of this man, Dotterman, greeting RFK at the foot of the elevators as Kennedy is coming down to give his victory speech. The entourage winds its way through the kitchen. Bill Barry, Kennedy's security man and ex FBI agent leads Kennedy along with Karl Uecker, the maitred'. While on stage I see this Dotterman conferring with Barry just as Kennedy is finishing his speech. They must be speaking of which way to take Kennedy off the stage.
"They must be ... " Pure supposition stated with unwarranted certainty -- and thus an otherwise compelling analysis is severely undermined.
But instead of having RFK delivered to Bill Barry, Dotterman tells Karl to grab Kennedy and bring him through the curtain and Dotterman is even saying "This way Senator" as he is holding open the back curtain. As Kennedy exits the curtain he is separated from all of his security persons including Barry, Rosie Greer and Rafer Johnson. This is premeditated. Enough detail for you Charles? If Sirhan is a "Manchurian Candidate" then who created him? At UC Berkeley, while reading the complete 26 volumes of Hearings and Exhibits for the Warren Commission, I also read many other government documents. One of them was Senate Hearings on MKULTRA. CIA had been working on a Manchurian candidate since 1954. The father of Mkultra is Richard Helms. He originated the study and sheparded it along while Assistant Deputy Director of Plans and later Deputy Director of Plans starting in 1962. In December of 1963, after having murdered President Kennedy, my analysis and later book, JFK VS. CIA, Helms argued against the inspector general for CIA who recommended closing down mkultra. Helms said that CIA now had drugs and other methods for creating amnesia for events during and prior a person's action. As you know Sirhan has no memory of shooting RFK. Since Richard Helms is the father of mkultra and mkultra is being used on Sirhan to turn him into a Manchurian candidate, then Helms is murdering Robert Kennedy in 1968. Richard Helms was Director of Central Intelligence in 1968. He was Deputy Director of Plans in 1963 and keeping all the deep secrets of what the agency was up to in 1963 from his boss, the director of CIA per senate hearings of the 1970s which I've also read. Is that enough detail for you Charles?
Not even close.
Unless, of course, you're prepared to define "CIA" as you use the term AND place "CIA" with the Evica-Drago Conspiracy Model -- or any other valid paradigm of its kind.
I ask you again, sir: "CIA" as Sponsor? "CIA" as Facilitator? "CIA as Mechanic?
I ask you again, sir: What the hell do you mean by "CIA"???
I value much of your work -- I daresay the majority of it. It is the religious fervor that you bring to your overly broad and simplistic indictment of "CIA" that causes your self-inflicted wounds.
Is that enough detail for you, Michael?