by Jon E. Lewis
9) Memphis, Tennessee, was the Lex Loci Domicilii of LOYD JOWERS at the time the illegal conspiracy was entered into. Defendant JOWERS today has sufficient contacts with the State of Tennessee as well as the City of Memphis and Shelby County, having owned and operated several businesses there and still having family in that city.
Parties
10) Plaintiffs are the widow and children of the victim of this illegal conspiracy and tortious actions of the Defendant.
11) Defendant LOYD JOWERS is a resident citizen of Tennessee with sufficient ties to Shelby County. In 1968, Defendant JOWERS was the owner of Jim’s Grill, 422 1/2 South Main, Memphis, and Shelby County in which establishment amongst other places in Memphis and Shelby County. Defendant has admitted the conspiracy took place and the murder was planned. He has also confirmed that it was behind his establishment, Jim’s Grill, where the murder was carried out.
Facts
12) In early 1968, Plaintiffs’ husband and father the Rev. Dr Martin Luther King Jr decided to come to Memphis, Tennessee in order to support striking sanitation workers in that city.
13) In or around the middle of March, Defendant JOWERS was approached by one FRANK C. LIBERTO, a Memphis resident and produce dealer, and asked to participate in a conspiracy to kill Dr King. LIBERTO told JOWERS that a person – a “patsy” – was in place to take the blame and that no police would be around. Defendant agreed to participate in the conspiracy to kill Dr King and eventually was provided with a large sum of money, some or all of which he turned over as instructed to a man he knew only as Raul. Their money was delivered to Defendant JOWERS in a vegetable box from another Memphis produce house, and Defendant JOWERS believed that it came from New Orleans.
14) During this time between the middle of March and the date of the murder, Defendant JOWERS observed and participated in a number of acts in furtherance of the conspiracy. These included planning meetings attended by persons known to him which took place in his establishment – Jim’s Grill.
15) In addition, in the morning of the day of the assassination, April 4, 1968, Defendant JOWERS received and concealed in Jim’s Grill a rifle from the man he had come to know as Raul.
16) Late in the afternoon of that day – 4 April 1968 – Defendant JOWERS gave the rifle to a third party, now deceased and known to him, who took it away.
17) Sometime before 6 p.m. on that same day, 4 April 1968, Defendant JOWERS, as he had been instructed, went out the back door of Jim’s Grill into the overgrown brush area at the rear of the building.
18) While waiting in that area sometime just after 6 p.m., he heard a shot and within seconds of that sound, the third party, to whom he had earlier given the gun, appeared and gave him the still smoking rifle. The shot he heard was the firing of the single bullet which struck and ultimately killed the victim, Dr Martin Luther King Jr.
19) Defendant JOWERS then ran carrying the rifle back inside Jim’s Grill entering through the rear kitchen door from which he had come out some time earlier.
20) He then proceeded to once again conceal the rifle, eventually placing it on the shelf under a counter in Jim’s Grill.
21) The next morning Defendant JOWERS turned the rifle over to Raul or another person who took it away. He never saw it again.
22) Defendant JOWERS and other persons, in furtherance of the conspiracy and the concealment of the tortious actions herein alleged directly and indirectly for approximately 29 years, participated in covering up the said tortious acts to the detriment, harm, injury, and damage to the Plaintiffs.
Count One
23) Paragraphs One through 22 are restated and incorporated herein.
24) Defendant LOYD JOWERS and FRANK C. LIBERTO, along with other known and unknown parties living and dead, entered into a conspiracy with a common design and illegal purpose, to-wit, to murder Dr Martin Luther King Jr after his scheduled arrival in Memphis on 3 April 1968.
25) Defendant JOWERS, LIBERTO, and other unknown parties living and dead acted in concert by having a rifle with James Earl Ray’s fingerprints on it placed on the sidewalk outside the rooming house adjacent to Jim’s Grill shortly before or immediately after Dr King was shot.
26) Defendant JOWERS acted in concert and collusion with the said others by taking the rifle from another person in or near the bushes in the rear of the establishment immediately after the rifle was used to shoot Dr King, knowing that the rifle had been used to kill Dr King as he stood on the balcony of the Lorraine Motel across Mulberry Street.
27) By entering into the criminal conspiracy to murder Dr King, Defendant JOWERS had also entered into a civil conspiracy to deprive Plaintiffs of the life, presence, companionship, and all the benefits resulting therefrom, tangible and intangible, material and spiritual, emotional and intellectual, which were available to Plaintiffs while their loved one was alive and taken from them forever with the death of their husband and father, said loss being the direct result of the tortious actions of the Defendant and others.
Count Two
28) Paragraphs One through 27 are restated and incorporated herein.
29) Defendant JOWERS’ actions, as described herein, constitute intentional and outrageous wanton, willful, and malicious conduct that reflect a common design, concert of action, participation in overt acts in furtherance of an illegal conspiracy, said conspiracy culminated with and resulted in injuries – both physical and mental – inflicted upon Plaintiffs for which they now seek redress.
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, PLAINTIFFS PRAY THAT:
1) Proper process be issued requiring Defendant JOWERS to answer this complaint or be subject to a default judgment being entered against him.
2) Plaintiffs be entitled to recover from Defendant JOWERS or any other Defendant whose identity might be learned through the discovery process, who participated in the illegal conspiracy described herein, actual and compensatory damages as well as punitive damages, as a result of the tortious conduct of Defendant JOWERS and his co-conspirators.
3) Plaintiffs be awarded such other further relief to which this Honorable Court may deem them entitled.
4) Plaintiffs demand a jury trial to determine all issues of fact.
NORMAN KIRK
Norman Kirk, the leader of the New Zealand Labour Party, swept to power in 1972 on a radical platform. Two years later he was dead, and replaced by finance minister Wallace Rowling, a figure distinctly more friendly towards big business.
For some Down Under, Kirk’s demise from a heart attack was regarded as altogether too convenient. The anonymous author of The Opal File, the antipodean equivalent of the Gemstone File, noted:
Mid-1974: Gough Whitlam and Norman Kirk begin a series of moves absolutely against the Mafia Trilateralists. Whitlam refuses to waive restrictions on overseas borrowings to finance Alwest Aluminium Consortium of Rupert Murdoch, BHP and R.J. Reynolds. Whitlam had also ended Vietnam War support, blocked uranium mining and wanted more control over US secret spy bases – e.g., Pine Gap.
Kirk had introduced a new, tough Anti-Monopoly Bill and had tried to redistribute income from big companies to the labour force through price regulation and a wages policy.
Kirk had also rejected plans to build a second aluminium smelter near Dunedin and was preparing the Petroleum Amendment Bill to give more control over New Zealand oil resources.
Kirk had found out that Hunt Petroleum, drilling in the Great South Basin, had discovered a huge resource of oil comparable in size to the North Sea or Alaskan North Slope. Gas reserves alone now estimated at 30 times bigger than Kapuni and oil reserves of at least 20 billion barrels – enough for New Zealand to be self-sufficient for years. Oil companies completely hushed up these facts. To have announced a vast new oil source would probably mean a decline in world oil prices, which would not have allowed OPEC and Onassis plans for the Arabs to eventuate. NZ could be exploited at a later date, particularly since the North Sea operations were about to come on stream – Kirk was the last to hold out.
September 1974: According to CIA sources, Kirk was killed by the Trilateralists using Sodium Morphate. Rowling’s first act as NZ Prime Minister was to withdraw Kirk’s Anti-Monopoly Bill and the Petroleum Amendment Bill.
Later, Rowling was to be rewarded with ambassadorship to Washington. Incidentally, the Shah of Iran was murdered the same way as Kirk on his arrival in the US.
Kirk, it might be added, had enemies other than “Trilateralists” and über-capitalists. He caused apoplexy within the French government when he protested against French nuclear tests in the Pacific (see Rainbow Warrior), and annoyed the apartheid regime in South Africa when he banned their rugby team from visiting NZ. The British-led conspiracy to oust Gough Whitlam, Kirk’s Australian prime ministerial counterpart, is well documented. Outside of the self-referring evidence of antipodean conspiracy theorists, however, no one has tied any agency to Kirk’s death, or forwarded convincing evidence that it was foul play.
Sodium morphate does not exist. Kirk had a history of heart trouble. The official cause of death was cardiac arrest. And there the Norman Kirk conspiracy rests.
NZ PM Norman Kirk was killed by Trilateralists: ALERT LEVEL 3
Further Reading
www.mindcontrolforums.com/opalfile.htm
KNIGHTS TEMPLAR
Not so long ago, the medieval Christian warriors known as the Knights Templar were a subject fit only for tweed-jacketed scholars and archaeologists, but all that changed with the publication of Holy Blood, Holy Grail in 1982 by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh and Henry Lincoln. Whereas orthodox scholarship determined that the Knights Templar had been dissolved by Pope Clement V in 1312, Baigent, Leigh and Lincoln proposed that the Templars were a front organization for a mysterious clique, the Priory of Sion, which survives to the present. Further, the three authors gave an answer to a puzzle which had long tantalized academic historians: how did the Knights Templar become so rich so quickly? The Templars had discovered the Holy Grail, said Baigent et al. It was, as many noted, the stuff of which thrillers were made . . . and years later Dan Brown duly obliged with The Da Vinci Code.
To begin at the beginning. In 1118, nine French crusaders asked Baldwin II of Jerusalem for permission to remain in the ruins of Solomon’s Temple in order, they said, to protect passing pilgrims. Officially named by the Holy See “The Order of the Poor Knights of Christ and the Temple of Solomon”, the Knights Templar eventually grew to over 20,000 strong, and they enjoyed extensive wealth.
To their detractors, the Templars became too numerous, too rich. On unlucky Friday 13 October 1307, all the Templars in France were arrested by King Philip IV “Le Bel” for crimes of heresy. Within a handful of years Pope Clement had banned the Knights Templar, and their Grand Master, Jacques de Molay, was burning at the stake in Paris. Allegedly the dying de Molay prophesied that Philip and Clement would die within the year. They did.
The Templars were an easy mark for a cash-strapped monarch like Philip IV. As one of the few organizations allowed to lend money, the Templars figured in most medieval minds in the same slot as the Jews. There were also widespread rumours – many coming from the mouth of a disgruntled former Templar, de Flexian – that in their long sojourn in the Middle East the Knights Templar had become corrupted by Mohammedanism and esoteric local faiths. The Knights Templar were believed to worship a talking head called “Baphomet” and undertake an initiation ceremony in which the Cross was spat on, and buttocks and penises were kissed. Sodomy, indeed, was said to be near mandatory within the Order. A “secret knowledge” guaranteed loyalty to the Order and silence over its heretical practices.
With the Pope’s bull of 1313 banning the Knights Templar, the Order ceased to exist. Allegedly. According to the Sovereign Military Order of the Temple of Jerusalem, one of the numerous modern claimants to the Templar title, a “Charter of Transmission” traces their organization directly back in time to de Molay. Other “alternative” theories have the Templars fleeing to Scotland, where they founded the Freemasons, or transmuting into the Illuminati.
Then there is the claim of Holy Blood, Holy Grail, repeated in Brown’s Da Vinci Code, that the clique behind the Templars, the Priory of Sion, carried on regardless after the Pope’s ban. The Priory of Sion were the custodians of the Holy Grail – the knowledge that Jesus had a child with Mary Magdalene, and that the Holy bloodline moved to France, where their descendants still reside.
The Templars/Priory of Sion are said to have discovered the Grail during their excavations of the Temple. It was this knowledge of the Grail which was the true cause of the Templars’ fall to ruin. If Jesus’s bloodline were still extant, the Papacy was illegitimate. To protect itself, the Papacy and its monarchical supporters ordered the extermination of those who knew the truth of the Grail – the Knights Templar.
The notion of still extant Knights Templar and documents proving the rewriting of Christianity by the Catholic Church is wildly popular – proof being the millions of copies of The Da Vinci Code which have been sold. Evidence to tie modern Templar claimants to the Knights Templar of yore is nonexistent, however. If the Templars live on it is in placenames such as Temple Meads, in their round churches like Garway, and in their ruined castles like Crak des Chevaliers.
One mystery does survive the Templars. The Holy Grail as Christ’s bloodline is, to quote historian Marina Warner, “hooey”, but what were the Templars looking for in their nine years of excavations in the Temple of Jerusalem?
And did they find it?
The Knights Templar survived the cull of the 14th century and live on today as guardians of the Holy Grail: ALERT LEVEL 3
Further Reading
Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh and Henry Lincoln, Holy Blood, Holy Grail, 1982
Dan Brown, The Da Vinci Code, 2003 [novel]
Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince, The Templar Revelations, 1998
Piers Paul Read, The Templars, 1999
JOHN LENNON
Everyone knows who shot former Beatle John Lennon outside the Dakota Building, New York, at 10.50 p.m. on 8 December 1980. Mark David Chapman, far from fleeing the scene of the crime, walked up and down on the sidewalk and started to read J. D. Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye. “I just shot John Lennon,” Chapman informed bewildered witnesses. He said the same to the judge months later at his court case, and was awarded 20 years to life in Attica State Prison as a result.
So that’s that, then. Chapman was the classic deranged fan, a psycho loser who felt the need for some attention. His defence psychiatrist defined Chapman’s condition as “paranoid schizophrenia”.
For some observers, however, too much about the Chapman/ Lennon case did not stand up. For a start Chapman, as a confirmed mental case, should not have been deemed fit to stand trial and certainly not sent to a standard prison to serve his time. On top of that, police detectives on the Chapman case noted that Chapman seemed “programmed” and, far from desiring attention, avoided it. In his one press interview Chapman said: “He [John Lennon] walked past me and then I heard in my head, ‘do it, do it’. . . I don’t remember aiming.” But aim he did – using a classic “combat stance”, according to eyewitnesses – and fired his Charter Arms .38 pistol five times. And, for someone who had spent years working as a children’s counsellor in refugee camps for World Vision, then bumming around and imbibing drugs, Chapman had an awful lot of cash and credit cards to his name.
For the veteran Californian conspiracy theorist Mae Brussell, Chapman’s strange mental state was clear evidence that he was a “Manchurian Candidate”, an assassin programmed to kill. Brussell thought Chapman’s masters were the Nazis, and that Lennon was killed as part of a long purge of rock stars from the US cultural scene. According to Brussell, only anodyne popsters like “Sonny and Cher, the Osmonds, John Denver, and Captain & Tennille make it”, and hippie Lennon was a must-kill.
Fenton Bresler proposes a more sophisticated take on the Manchurian Candidate thesis in Who Killed John Lennon?, where he notes that World
Vision, the religious charity for which Chapman worked, was purportedly a CIA front outfit linked to the sect which overdosed at Jonestown. Chapman, says Bresler, was hypnotized under the CIA’s MK-ULTRA project to kill Lennon. Bresler hardly needs to look far for a motive. Lennon was a prominent critic of US foreign and domestic policy. His couplet “All we are saying is/Give peace a chance” seemed, from Vietnam to Central America, to be about the last thing on the minds of successive White House regimes. Lennon had also played a small part in the Watergate expose, when he financed the publication of Mae Brussell’s prescient, insider-informed notes on the scandal (researched independently of Woodward and Bernstein at the Washington Post) in the underground magazine The Realist.
John Lennon was assassinated by a CIA-sponsored ‘Manchurian Candidate’: ALERT LEVEL 3
Further Reading
Fenton Bresler, Who Killed John Lennon?, 1989
ALEXANDER LITVINENKO
On 1 November 2006 London was full of Russians, there to watch Arsenal play CKSA Moscow in the Champions League. Mingling with the fans was a Russian killer, or killers, with a very different type of goal in mind.
