Post by John Duncan on Sept 25, 2020 21:58:45 GMT -5
The Assassination Of Benigno Aquino & What It Shows
From the book “Gods Of Eden" (1993) by William Bramley
Quote on
An assassination in the Philippines proved, however, that such scenarios may sometimes be the cover for a murder committed by an intelligence organization.
The year was 1983. Benigno Aquino was a popular opposition leader in the Philippine Islands. The Philippines were then under the dictatorial rule of President Ferdinand Marcos. Marcos had declared martial law in the 1960’s and never saw fit to lift it. After three years of voluntary exile from his homeland, Aquino made a decision to return to his country even though six years earlier he had been sentenced to death by firing squad for his political activities.
Aquino’s airplane landed at Manila Airport on August 21, 1983. Surrounded by Filipino security officers, Aquino had just descended the stairs from the airplane when shots rang out. A bullet hit him in the back of the head and killed him. The “lone assassin,” Rolando Galman y Dawang, was on the tarmac (runway area) and was instantly shot dead by a security man near him. The government immediately declared Galman the “lone assassin” and tried to close the case.
Suspicions arose immediately.
President Marcos had a motive for killing Aquino and Aquino had already been sentenced to death. To quash these suspicions, Marcos convened an official panel to investigate the killing, similar to the Warren Commission impaneled twenty years earlier in the United States to investigate the John Kennedy assassination. Critics charged that the Marcos panel was one-sided and pro-Marcos. Many doubted that the panel would come to any conclusion other than the official one. Something unexpected occurred, however. The panel pursued the investigation objectively. It heard evidence about the powder burn on Aquino’s head indicating that the fatal bullet was fired from 12 to 18 inches away.
The government claimed Galman had come that close, but eyewitnesses did not confirm this. A journalist on the plane testified that two security men standing right next to Aquino had pulled out their revolvers and had pointed them at the back of Aquino’s head just before the shots rang out. Overwhelming forensic evidence and eyewitness testimony indicated that Aquino was shot by one of the security men assigned to “protect” him. The “lone assassin” was nothing more than a crude cover. The Marcos commission issued a finding to that effect.
The panel findings resulted in the criminal indictments of several high-ranking military officers. At trial, however, all were acquitted. The vagaries of the Filipino justice system did not permit a great deal of crucial testimony acquired by the commission to be introduced at trial. A number of important witnesses for the prosecution did not appear. Several witnesses had reported being intimidated. After Marcos was ousted from office and sent into a plush Hawaiian exile by Benigno Aquino’s wife, Corazon Aquino, witnesses came forward testifying that the trial had been rigged by Marcos. Other eyewitnesses to the shooting also came forward with further evidence corroborating that Benigno Aquino had been shot by a security man.
The significance of the Aquino killing is that the scenario of the shooting is virtually identical to other “lone assassin” episodes. If, for example, there existed a conspiracy behind either the RFK or Ronald Reagan shooting, then the modus operanti would appear to be identical to the modus operand in the Aquino shooting: a mentally-disturbed or politically-fanatical “lone assassin” is used as a cover for the true assassin who is on the scene as a security escort for the victim. This is important because the Filipino officers indicted for masterminding the Aquino shooting included General Fabian Ver and men under his command.
Ver not only led the nation’s military forces, but also its intelligence network. In other words, the “lone assassin” shooting of Benigno Aquino was a military/intelligence operation. This is significant because the Philippine Republic was a major U.S. ally at the time of the shooting, and the U.S. still has large naval and air bases there. The Philippines receive a great deal of aid from the United States, along with U.S. military and intelligence advisors. The Filipino intelligence apparatus therefore owes much to the American CIA and U.S. military intelligence. This is not to say that American sources were necessarily involved in the Aquino shooting.
It simply shows how an important Western intelligence service recently utilized the “lone assassin” technique, but used it so crudely that people saw through it immediately. Even U.S. newspapers which have been quick to accept “lone assassin” verdicts in American assassinations ran editorials condemning the acquittal of the Filipino military men. Our hats should go off to those brave panel members who had the courage to look behind the “lone assassin” myth, and to those eyewitnesses who were brave enough to testify. Such integrity is a precious commodity.
Quote off
From the book “Gods Of Eden" (1993) by William Bramley
Quote on
An assassination in the Philippines proved, however, that such scenarios may sometimes be the cover for a murder committed by an intelligence organization.
The year was 1983. Benigno Aquino was a popular opposition leader in the Philippine Islands. The Philippines were then under the dictatorial rule of President Ferdinand Marcos. Marcos had declared martial law in the 1960’s and never saw fit to lift it. After three years of voluntary exile from his homeland, Aquino made a decision to return to his country even though six years earlier he had been sentenced to death by firing squad for his political activities.
Aquino’s airplane landed at Manila Airport on August 21, 1983. Surrounded by Filipino security officers, Aquino had just descended the stairs from the airplane when shots rang out. A bullet hit him in the back of the head and killed him. The “lone assassin,” Rolando Galman y Dawang, was on the tarmac (runway area) and was instantly shot dead by a security man near him. The government immediately declared Galman the “lone assassin” and tried to close the case.
Suspicions arose immediately.
President Marcos had a motive for killing Aquino and Aquino had already been sentenced to death. To quash these suspicions, Marcos convened an official panel to investigate the killing, similar to the Warren Commission impaneled twenty years earlier in the United States to investigate the John Kennedy assassination. Critics charged that the Marcos panel was one-sided and pro-Marcos. Many doubted that the panel would come to any conclusion other than the official one. Something unexpected occurred, however. The panel pursued the investigation objectively. It heard evidence about the powder burn on Aquino’s head indicating that the fatal bullet was fired from 12 to 18 inches away.
The government claimed Galman had come that close, but eyewitnesses did not confirm this. A journalist on the plane testified that two security men standing right next to Aquino had pulled out their revolvers and had pointed them at the back of Aquino’s head just before the shots rang out. Overwhelming forensic evidence and eyewitness testimony indicated that Aquino was shot by one of the security men assigned to “protect” him. The “lone assassin” was nothing more than a crude cover. The Marcos commission issued a finding to that effect.
The panel findings resulted in the criminal indictments of several high-ranking military officers. At trial, however, all were acquitted. The vagaries of the Filipino justice system did not permit a great deal of crucial testimony acquired by the commission to be introduced at trial. A number of important witnesses for the prosecution did not appear. Several witnesses had reported being intimidated. After Marcos was ousted from office and sent into a plush Hawaiian exile by Benigno Aquino’s wife, Corazon Aquino, witnesses came forward testifying that the trial had been rigged by Marcos. Other eyewitnesses to the shooting also came forward with further evidence corroborating that Benigno Aquino had been shot by a security man.
The significance of the Aquino killing is that the scenario of the shooting is virtually identical to other “lone assassin” episodes. If, for example, there existed a conspiracy behind either the RFK or Ronald Reagan shooting, then the modus operanti would appear to be identical to the modus operand in the Aquino shooting: a mentally-disturbed or politically-fanatical “lone assassin” is used as a cover for the true assassin who is on the scene as a security escort for the victim. This is important because the Filipino officers indicted for masterminding the Aquino shooting included General Fabian Ver and men under his command.
Ver not only led the nation’s military forces, but also its intelligence network. In other words, the “lone assassin” shooting of Benigno Aquino was a military/intelligence operation. This is significant because the Philippine Republic was a major U.S. ally at the time of the shooting, and the U.S. still has large naval and air bases there. The Philippines receive a great deal of aid from the United States, along with U.S. military and intelligence advisors. The Filipino intelligence apparatus therefore owes much to the American CIA and U.S. military intelligence. This is not to say that American sources were necessarily involved in the Aquino shooting.
It simply shows how an important Western intelligence service recently utilized the “lone assassin” technique, but used it so crudely that people saw through it immediately. Even U.S. newspapers which have been quick to accept “lone assassin” verdicts in American assassinations ran editorials condemning the acquittal of the Filipino military men. Our hats should go off to those brave panel members who had the courage to look behind the “lone assassin” myth, and to those eyewitnesses who were brave enough to testify. Such integrity is a precious commodity.
Quote off