Was the JFK records release a dud? Is Conspiracy World on the brink?

[Jon Banks]

And what is in these files that the LN side is ignoring? That's the original question, the lastest release.

Almost everything since the ARRB has been ignored by leading LN'ers like Gerald Posner.

We know far more today about inconsistencies in the Medical evidence, problems with the chain of custody on several key pieces of evidence, the extent to which the CIA lied about their interest in Oswald prior to 11/22/63.

With the LN crowd, we predictably get the circular logic of "Oswald alone did it therefore any problems with the evidence aren't relevant".

A clear case of Confirmation Bias.

Everything the conspiracy side has asked for has been answered.

Not true. We have yet to see the declassification of specific files relating to the travel records of CIA officers like Bill Harvey and George Joannides in 1963. Why is the CIA still keeping secret documents relating to long deceased CIA officers?

Bill Harvey, whose wife admits hated JFK with a passion, is alleged by some to have travelled from Italy to Dallas shortly before the assassination. If confirmed that he did in fact visit Dallas around that time, it adds to the circumstantial argument for his involvement with the plot. The CIA's secrecy regarding that matter only increases speculation about the theories involving Harvey.

George Joannides primarily worked in Miami but it was recently confirmed that he had a residence in New Orleans in 1963. If he was in New Orleans at the time when LHO was engaging with members of the DRE, a group who reported to Joannides, that would look even worse for the CIA's choice of him to be their liaison for the HSCA. 

There are other files still being kept secret as well. Contrary to Trump's announcement, not all of the government's JFK related files have been released to the public.

[Tom Graves]

Almost everything since the ARRB has been ignored by leading LN'ers like Gerald Posner.

We know far more today about inconsistencies in the Medical evidence, problems with the chain of custody on several key pieces of evidence, the extent to which the CIA lied about their interest in Oswald prior to 11/22/63.

With the LN crowd, we predictably get the circular logic of "Oswald alone did it therefore any problems with the evidence aren't relevant".

A clear case of Confirmation Bias.

Not true. We have yet to see the declassification of specific files relating to the travel records of CIA officers like Bill Harvey and George Joannides in 1963. Why is the CIA still keeping secret documents relating to long deceased CIA officers?

Bill Harvey, whose wife admits hated JFK with a passion, is alleged by some to have travelled from Italy to Dallas shortly before the assassination. If confirmed that he did in fact visit Dallas around that time, it adds to the circumstantial argument for his involvement with the plot. The CIA's secrecy regarding that matter only increases speculation about the theories involving Harvey.

George Joannides primarily worked in Miami but it was recently confirmed that he had a residence in New Orleans in 1963. If he was in New Orleans at the time when LHO was engaging with members of the DRE, a group who reported to Joannides, that would look even worse for the CIA's choice of him to be their liaison for the HSCA. 

There are other files still being kept secret as well. Contrary to Trump's announcement, not all of the government's JFK related files have been released to the public.

Dear Lefty-Righty Banksy,

If Oswald didn't do it, then how many witting bad guys and really, really bad gals do you figure were involved, altogether, in the planning, the "patsy-ing," the shooting, and maybe even the all-important cover up?

Just a few, or oodles and gobs?

-- Tom

[Jon Banks]

Dear Lefty-Righty Banksy,

If Oswald didn't do it, then how many witting bad guys and really, really bad gals do you figure were involved, altogether, in the planning, the "patsy-ing," the shooting, and maybe even the all-important cover up?

Just a few, or oodles and gobs?

-- Tom

In the big picture, if there was a conspiracy, it doesn't matter whether LHO fired a shot or not.

[Tom Graves]

In the big picture, if there was a conspiracy, it doesn't matter whether LHO fired a shot or not.

Nice side-step, Lefty-Righty Banksy!

If it was a conspiracy in which Oswald didn't fire a shot, how many witting bad guys and really, really bad gals do you figure were involved in the planning, the "patsy-ing," the shooting, and maybe even the all-important cover up?

Just a few, or oodles and gobs?

If it was a conspiracy that involved Oswald's firing one shot (or throwing one firecracker), how many witting bad guys and really, really bad gals do you figure were involved in the planning, the shooting (other than Oswald), the "patsy-ing," and maybe even the all-important cover up?

Just a few, or oodles and gobs?

If it was a conspiracy that involved Oswald's firing two shots (or throwing two firecrackers), how many witting bad guys and really, really bad gals do you figure were involved in the planning, the shooting (other than Oswald), the "patsy-ing," and maybe even the all-important cover up?

Just a few, or oodles and gobs?

If it was a conspiracy that involved Oswald's firing all three shots (or throwing three firecrackers), how many witting bad guys and really, really bad gals do you figure were involved in the planning, the shooting (other than Oswald), the "patsy-ing," and maybe even the all-important cover up?

Just a few, or oodles and gobs?

-- Tom

[Joe Elliott]

Who would have thought ten years ago that the JFK files, complete with social security numbers, would be released before Epstein files were.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

Almost everything since the ARRB has been ignored by leading LN'ers like Gerald Posner.

We know far more today about inconsistencies in the Medical evidence, problems with the chain of custody on several key pieces of evidence, the extent to which the CIA lied about their interest in Oswald prior to 11/22/63.

With the LN crowd, we predictably get the circular logic of "Oswald alone did it therefore any problems with the evidence aren't relevant".

A clear case of Confirmation Bias.

Not true. We have yet to see the declassification of specific files relating to the travel records of CIA officers like Bill Harvey and George Joannides in 1963. Why is the CIA still keeping secret documents relating to long deceased CIA officers?

Bill Harvey, whose wife admits hated JFK with a passion, is alleged by some to have travelled from Italy to Dallas shortly before the assassination. If confirmed that he did in fact visit Dallas around that time, it adds to the circumstantial argument for his involvement with the plot. The CIA's secrecy regarding that matter only increases speculation about the theories involving Harvey.

George Joannides primarily worked in Miami but it was recently confirmed that he had a residence in New Orleans in 1963. If he was in New Orleans at the time when LHO was engaging with members of the DRE, a group who reported to Joannides, that would look even worse for the CIA's choice of him to be their liaison for the HSCA. 

There are other files still being kept secret as well. Contrary to Trump's announcement, not all of the government's JFK related files have been released to the public.

The question was about the latest release and now you're off into conspiracy wonderland where more files and more evidence supposedly exists. This is, frankly, what Morley does and he needs to be held accountable for it.

Morley and other conspiracists have made claim after claim after claim about these withheld files over the years. That is the topic not the 1993 files or some other files (Bill Harvey's files? And then what, Phillips' files? And then some other files?). The ARRB files are now all out there and all of these claims have been shown to be groundless. Should they be held accountable or not? If you don't care whether Morley or others simply make things up then fine, just say so.

And really, Joannides had a home in New Orleans and that's evidence of his involvement in a counter intelligence operation using Oswald? Talk about confirmation bias.

[Lance Payette]

What really struck me in the Morley-Schnapf-Shellenberger video that Jon recently posted - an extensive portion of which was devoted to the UFO phenomenon and UFO secrecy - was confirmation of what I have always suspected: I don't think Morley is genuinely interested in the JFKA as an historical event at all. I think he knows perfectly well that Oswald killed JFK. What he is actually interested in is increased government transparency, to the extent that even the intelligence agencies would scarcely be allowed to keep any secrets. The JFKA is mostly just a vehicle for this message: OK, we didn't really learn anything new about the JFKA - BUT LOOK AT ALL THIS STUFF THE CIA HID AND LIED ABOUT THAT WE THE PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN!!!

Equating JFKA secrecy and UFO secrecy is a bit weird. Only Shellenberger seemed to have any clue what he was talking about.

Let's take a CTer's dream and say the truth of the JFKA is: LBJ masterminded it, high-level operatives of the CIA organized it, and Hoover was on board from the get-go. OK, interesting, but it was 62 years ago. A news story with legs for a few weeks, but then we want something new and more relevant. In three months, it's a big yawn, consigned to the dustbin of history. Nothing the public can't handle or even cares much about. Even Morley's quest for vastly increased transparency is just an unrealistic pipe dream. It's never going to happen, nor should it.

Morley and Shellenberger seemed to think the truth about UFOs is probably something like "Yes, aliens are visiting us" and that the public likewise could handle this. I've been deeply involved with the UFO phenomenon since childhood (yes, childhood). In 1971, I had a startling daylight experience in the company of an arch-skeptic. My very educated guess would be that what the government would be able to reveal would actually be something more along the lines of: "Yes, the phenomenon is very real. We have tons of data we haven't shared. We have utterly no clue what the phenomenon is, what intelligence is behind it, where it is coming from (if it's coming from anywhere) or whether it is malicious or benign. It is completely beyond our understanding of physics. It suggests reality may be fundamentally different from what we have always understood it to be. We are at the mercy of whatever it is. There is nothing we can do but wait and see what, if anything, happens next."

(Stanislaw Lem's wonderful novel Solaris, which was made into a wonderfully faithful Russian movie and then a typical Hollywood schlock-fest, has as its theme that if we ever encounter a non-human intelligence we may never have the faintest understanding of what it is doing or why - or perhaps even that we have encountered it.)

It seems to me that this message might be a bit harder for the public to handle.

Anyway, that's my theory about the entire Morley wing of Conspiracy World. The JFKA is simply an event to be milked in furtherance of an agenda that has nothing to do with the JFKA per se. And, yes, I do think Conspiracy World is indeed right on the brink of going poof except in the minds of a comparative handful of Aging White Men for whom it has become a substitute religion of sorts.

[Jon Banks]

The question was about the latest release and now you're off into conspiracy wonderland where more files and more evidence supposedly exists. This is, frankly, what Morley does and he needs to be held accountable for it.

Accountability for Morley but not the CIA for lying under oath and obstructing JFK investigations? Listen to how you sound.

What do you have against holding government agencies accountable? The government's secrets belong to the American public. Hence the FOIA law.

The simplest thing the agency can do is to dispel speculation about Joannides' involvement with the DRE in New Orleans in 1963 is to declassify everything.

And really, Joannides had a home in New Orleans and that's evidence of his involvement in a counter intelligence operation using Oswald? Talk about confirmation bias.

If Joannides was working with the DRE (a CIA-funded operation) in New Orleans at the same time when they were engaging with Oswald, what's the innocent explanation for why he didn't disclose that to the Warren Commission or the HSCA?

From my POV, the only reason to suppress or omit that information is because Joannides and the agency had something to hide. What exactly? I'm not sure.

It makes even less sense today now that it's widely known the extent to which the CIA was backing anti-Castro groups.

To be clear, even if it's true that Joannides was more involved with the DRE's engagement with Oswald than has been disclosed up until now (proving that he hid that information from the HSCA), it doesn't prove that he or the CIA was involved with a plot against JFK. It's possible that whatever the New Orleans stuff was about had nothing to do with a JFK plot. But it would raise more questions than answers.