Jewish Mob Murdered Lindbergh Baby for Illuminati
September 25, 2015
(left, Anna Hauptmann in 1981)
Hauptmann was chosen to be the patsy for the plot to turn and shift the psychology of America against Germany prior to our entry into WWII while at the same time sabotaging any political aspirations Lindbergh may have harbored to run for the Presidency.
L.C. Vincent interviewed Lindbergh kidnapping patsy's widow.
The 1932 kidnapping, which involved Detroit's Purple Gang (all Jews) was not simply a "warning" to Lindbergh;
it was a way to completely de-rail his psyche from ever considering running for the Presidency.
by L.C. Vincent
(henrymakow.com)
I met Anna Hauptmann in San Francisco in the early 80's when I videotaped her testimony for the Court of Historical Review. Afterwards I had dinner with her and her Attorney, Robert Bryan. Mrs. Hauptmann spoke freely and frankly to me. She testified with tears in her eyes that "her Richard" was in bed with her that night, all night, just as he had been with her every night of their marriage.
She testified that she would have known and noticed if he had been missing for several hours on the night the Lindbergh baby was kidnapped. She said that there are some things only a wife, and only a woman would know; and that it would have been impossible for Richard to have left her side for several hours and not be missed. She swore upon her honor and upon a Bible that her testimony was true.
From my own investigation into this wormhole, I surmised that Hauptmann was chosen to be the patsy for the plot to turn and shift the psychology of America against Germany prior to our entry into WWII while at the same time sabotaging any political aspirations Lindbergh may have harbored to run for the Presidency. The forces that drew our entry into this war cast a long shadow, as essentially it had been planned and anticipated even as the ashes of WWI were still smouldering in the air.
If anyone studies Lindbergh's influence on U.S. society at the time, it clearly verged on hero worship. While Lindbergh may have been too young in 1932 to run for President, it would be ludicrous to think Lindbergh was not considering it. Remember, he was extremely patriotic, his father, a Congressman in the U.S. House of Representatives, valiantly fought the creation of the Federal Reserve and its attendant gestapo IRS, and Lindbergh knew that there was one "element" in our society -- the "international" Jew -- who yearned for another war with Germany.
The kidnapping, which involved Detroit's Purple Gang (all Jews) was not simply a "warning" to Lindbergh; it was a way to completely de-rail his psyche from ever considering running for the Presidency.
And as for Hauptmann proclaiming his innocence until the end, Anna Hauptmann told me that the Governor of New Jersey (Harold G. Hoffman) visited Richard Hauptmann the night before his execution and offered him a deal of life in prison if only he would admit to some kind of involvement in the kidnapping. Anna told me that "her Richard" refused this gift of life, because he told her that to admit false complicity would place his soul in jeopardy before God.
While I will not dispute any of James Perloff's circumstantial evidence, it remains circumstantial. If Hauptmann were truly guilty, why was it necessary for the authorities to tamper and manipulate so much of the evidence in order to convict Hauptmann? Why would they fear a fair trial? Simply because this outrageous crime also required a human sacrifice.
Was it truly "coincidental" that Isidore Fisch, (Jew), the man who left part of the Lindbergh ransom money in a box for Hauptmann at his home, left the box with Hauptmann (without telling him the contents) and abandoned the Hauptmann residence still owing Hauptmann money; and this marked money just "happened" to be the marked money which was offered as ransom in the Lindbergh kidnapping?
Richard Hauptmann never went by nor used the name of "Bruno." This was devised by the yellow Hearst Press to identify him as yet another loathsome "Hun" (German), yet another ploy to whip up anti-German sentiment prior to our planned and pre-determined entry into WWII. Yet even today, you will find multiple references to "Bruno" Hauptmann, a name which was a complete fabrication and yet further (circumstantial) evidence of the "hidden hand" manipulating these events for public consumption.
It would seem the preponderance of evidence suggests that Hauptmann was set up to be the patsy and scapegoat in the Lindbergh kidnapping in order to subtly turn American sentiment against Germany. Just as Lindbergh's role in American history requires he be appreciated as more than a simple "Mail Pilot", Hauptmann's role in American history requires him to be seen as a pivotal psychological scapegoat, the receptacle and embodiment of the hatred the Lindbergh baby kidnapping produced, a loathing and rejection which was then transferred to Hauptmann's ethnic inheritance. Qui bono???
When one steps back and judges the tenure of the times, including Father Coughlan's diatribes against the International Jewish bankers, as well as the thrust of Lindbergh's potential political aspirations and his sympathy towards Germany which mirrored Henry Ford's, it would appear that the weight of history argues that Richard Hauptmann was innocent and (like Lee Harvey Oswald) used as a convenient patsy and scapegoat while the "message" of the event was sufficient to permanently derail any political ambitions Lindbergh may have had to run for the Presidency and forge an alliance with Germany.
-----------------
Also by L.C. Vincent
First Comment by Amanda Stevens:
Dear Henry, I have waited so many years for the truth to come out over the Lindberg baby case .
I am the grand daughter of the Jack Cunningham mentioned in the case as working for the NJ sheriffs office
and he said they were all sworn to secrecy but they all knew Hauptman was set up and the jews did it, as the kidnap and murder tallied up pretty well with what the jews had been threatening. I exchanged many letters with Moshe Solomons who was working with both the FOI act and jewish groups in the USA to find the truth.
Moshe who was ex Mossad whistleblew in disgust over the treatment of Mordechi Vanunnu and moved to England, Moshe wanted any info at all that my grand father knew, and was especially interested that my grandfather had a lot of photos that were never used, the baby was bled out and at the time the Sheriffs office thought this was to be used for cake making, as he said the blood of white Christians was important for this and also to bless mezuzas, whatever that is. He also said the Israeli leader Menachem Begin used to kidnap a lot of small Arab boys through the Stern gang, and he would rape and bleed them out, as they do in kosher kilings, Moshe Solomons also claimed Menachem Begin was the first of Jimmy Savilles protectors at the jewish-run BBC, Moshe believed that Menachen Begin had some influence over what was done.
I was thrilled to see the truth coming out at last and Moshe who became a friend through the many letters we sent would have asked that we remember there are many good jews out there who do not partake of child sacrifice of this nature
James Perloff replies:
A few points:
I have the greatest respect for Anna Hauptmann and her belief in her husband's innocence. However, as to Anna not missing Richard "in bed," a lone kidnapper, with a ladder in his car, was seen arriving near the Lindbergh residence at about 6 PM by neighbor Ben Lupica, a highly reliable witness. (Anna was working at a restaurant at that hour.) The kidnapping occurred between 8 and 10 PM. While this DOES create timeline problems for Hauptmann returning to the Bronx in a timely fashion, this was NOT a middle-of-the-night crime.
No one seems interested in what Lindbergh thought. Lindbergh never doubted Hauptmann's guilt. Lindbergh later spoke out fearlessly against the Jews and their war-mongering, but never did he implicate them in this crime.
As to the evidence being circumstantial, it is STRONG circumstantial, when you have the ransom loot buried in secret holes in your garage, and your own wood matching wood on the kidnap ladder.
As to the Purple Gang, they were known for kidnapping, and were immediately suspected and investigated. There is not even circumstantial evidence implicating them. Yes, they were Jews, but that is not evidence. The homemade kidnap ladder was not one of their trademarks; it was especially built with its rungs far apart--very light, and ideal for a one-man carry.
The Lindberghs, not having sufficient confidence in law enforcement to solve the crime, directly recruited two of New York's top underworld bosses, "Salvy" Spitale and Irving Bitz. If this was an underworld caper, someone should have squealed. It was Hauptmann's solo status that kept him totally off the radar screen of both the cops AND the underworld for so long.
The writer is absolutely correct that Hauptmann never went by the name "Bruno" in the U.S.
Quick question for Amanda: You said your father Jack Cunningham was mentioned as working for the NJ Sheriff's office at the time. I have many books on the kidnapping, and have never seen him mentioned, nor was he ever mentioned on the exhaustive Lindbergh Kidnapping Discussion Board, where we have had a number of descendants of the principles make contributing posts. The case was handled locally by the New Jersey State Police, and I have never seen anything suggesting the cops took oaths of secrecy to protect the Jews. I CAN say that, for a number of them, their deep admiration and respect for Charles Lindbergh would have definitely outweighed any such pressures. Do you have any letters from your grandfather or other documentation for this? I'm sure the discussion board would welcome contributions from you.
Glen said (September 26, 2015):
Sorry, I just had to chime in here and an add a few things which were not mentioned here. The following comes from Dave McGowan's best seller "Programed To Kill". Dave's take on the kidnapping of "Eaglet" has a darker side, and as hard as it might be to believe, it is hard to argue with facts. The body was not Lindbergh's child. I submit Dave's thoughts on this matter for your consideration. For the "rest of the story" you will have to read Dave's book.
For more of Dave's work visit.
http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/index.html