JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate => Topic started by: John Mytton on March 18, 2025, 09:04:49 AM
-
Finally, here they come, 80,000 pages of the last JFK files will be released on Tuesday 19/03/2025.
What are your predictions of what's in the files?
Personally I don't see anything major or new will be revealed, maybe some embarrassing stuff ups which could explain why they were withheld for so long? But those expecting a smoking gun in the JFKA will be sadly disappointed and when the files reveal absolutely nothing relevant, I can guarantee that the hardcore CT's will be crying foul and demanding that the "hidden" files be released and the never ending search for the "truth" will continue into infinity and beyond!!!
JohnM
-
Finally, here they come, 80,000 pages of the last JFK files will be released on Tuesday 19/03/2025.
What are your predictions of what's in the files?
Personally I don't see anything major or new will be revealed, maybe some embarrassing stuff ups which could explain why they were withheld for so long? But those expecting a smoking gun in the JFKA will be sadly disappointed and when the files reveal absolutely nothing relevant, I can guarantee that the hardcore CT's will be crying foul and demanding that the "hidden" files be released and the never ending search for the "truth" will continue into infinity and beyond!!!
JohnM
No disrespect intended, but in the video, when President Trump said “it’s going to be very interesting”, I couldn’t help but be reminded of Colonel Klink in the classic TV series “Hogan’s Heroes” and his “verrry interesting” saying. What he meant by that remains to be seen. However, it does appear the wait for these documents is just about over with. Thank you Mr. President.
-
Finally, here they come, 80,000 pages of the last JFK files will be released on Tuesday 19/03/2025.
What are your predictions of what's in the files?
Personally I don't see anything major or new will be revealed, maybe some embarrassing stuff ups which could explain why they were withheld for so long? But those expecting a smoking gun in the JFKA will be sadly disappointed and when the files reveal absolutely nothing relevant, I can guarantee that the hardcore CT's will be crying foul and demanding that the "hidden" files be released and the never ending search for the "truth" will continue into infinity and beyond!!!
JohnM
The reality is, the release will change nothing, for the following related reasons:
1. The CT community will never be satisfied until they are allowed to define what constitutes a JFKA-related record. If the release doesn't include Joannides' wife's recipe for lasagna, the CT community will continue to scream. Jefferson Morley and his hand-picked team must be allowed to rummage through all Federal offices at will, deciding for the rest of us what looks like it "might be interesting."
2. If the release reveals nothing genuinely significant, as it surely will, public and media interest in the JFKA will come to a screeching halt unless the CT community continues to beat the drum that the real smoking guns have not been released. Ergo, the CT community will continue to beat the drum.
3. Even when the release reveals nothing genuinely significant, the CT community will insist it does, thereby opening the door to 12 new tangents whose records must now be released. Basically, every federal record from 1959 to 1965, including those at the Bureau of Animal Husbandry, potentially might shed light on the JFKA. We need them all, dammit.
4. Alas for the Feds, they can never prove that all the records have in fact been released. Hence, the myth that the real smoking guns are in a lead-lined crypt somewhere beneath an alien underground base in Dulce, NM, will never die.
Anyone familiar with ufology knows this is the game. The UFO community has kept the myth of the smoking gun records about the Alien Presence alive for far longer that the JFKA records brouhaha. (There is a thread on the Ed Forum right now that JFK was killed because he was about to reveal the Alien Presence. I first heard this lunacy at the MUFON convention in Las Vegas in 1987, from the mouths of John Lear and Bill Cooper. As I recall, Cooper had photos "proving" SA Hickey shot JFK.)
It's like Prayer Person and so many other areas of CT wackiness. It simply makes no sense. Ask yourself: If there ever were smoking gun records, what possible sense would it make for them to still be in existence more than a few weeks after the JFKA? It's just self-evidently silly ... isn't it?
-
This release today is anti-climatic. I just discovered Indisputable Image Evidence connected to Black Dog Man and Gordon Arnold. And probably the WHITE SHIRT MAN running up-The Steps on the NIX FILM. I have always said that area between The Short Wall and the Picket Fence was a Black Hole. Not any more! Stay Tuned.
-
My understanding is that access to these documents has been granted to some researchers, and they contain no bombshell. Certainly nothing that demonstrates a conspiracy. Thank goodness, however, for Trump initiating their release. It does take away the tired claim that if there was nothing to hide, then the government would have released all the documents. I don't think that there is a lot left to be learned. This is already the most investigated case in history. I hold out some hope that the CIA has more information on Oswald's visit to Mexico City than they have ever admitted but it's equally possible that they were just incompetent and there is nothing to reveal.
-
My understanding is that access to these documents has been granted to some researchers, and they contain no bombshell. Certainly nothing that demonstrates a conspiracy. Thank goodness, however, for Trump initiating their release. It does take away the tired claim that if there was nothing to hide, then the government would have released all the documents. I don't think that there is a lot left to be learned. This is already the most investigated case in history. I hold out some hope that the CIA has more information on Oswald's visit to Mexico City than they have ever admitted but it's equally possible that they were just incompetent and there is nothing to reveal.
The, "most investigated case In History"? If Evidence has been Withheld and/or Altered, in addition to the Crime Scene being manipulated, then the "most investigated case in history" has been led astray.
-
The, "most investigated case In History"? If Evidence has been Withheld and/or Altered, in addition to the Crime Scene being manipulated, then the "most investigated case in history" has been led astray.
That's the endless CTer rabbit hole. The conspiracy can never be proven because someone is covering up the evidence. An endless loop that can never be broken. Like the dogs at the race track forever chasing that rabbit. Even if you want to cling to that, it is still the most investigated criminal case in history. It has been investigated by federal and state law enforcement authorities. They have generated tens of millions pages of documents. Independent "researchers" have investigated the case for decades. This forum alone shows that just about every rock has been turned over searching for answers. Even the pebbles. I can't think of any other case in history that has received so much attention and pedantic nitpicking of every detail.
-
I'll take a leap and ask 'What could be embarrassing so as to warrant keeping them hidden so long?' My guess is the records contain a critical assessment of the Secret Service's performance that day and the night before.
-
I'll take a leap and ask 'What could be embarrassing so as to warrant keeping them hidden so long?' My guess is the records contain a critical assessment of the Secret Service's performance that day and the night before.
You could well be right, or at least correct that what we're talking about are things of that level.
On the other hand, take a look at the zero-response thread I started on "The JKA records: a bit of perspective." The CIA didn't declassify the last of its WORLD WAR ONE records until 2011, and umpteen World War Two records are still classified. What, you or I might ask, could POSSIBLY warrant World War One records continuing to be classified almost 100 years after the end of the war? What makes sense within the walls of a secretive government agency is not necessarily what makes sense outside those walls.
-
I'll take a leap and ask 'What could be embarrassing so as to warrant keeping them hidden so long?' My guess is the records contain a critical assessment of the Secret Service's performance that day and the night before.
I think the Secret Service agents were in an impossible position, but any deficiencies were apparent to anyone who has reviewed the Z-film and case. Slow or no reaction to the first shot. Those were different times, though. Less training and fewer resources. Even so, it would have been difficult under the circumstances to have made any difference. Oswald held all the advantages. The element of surprise firing from an elevated concealed location behind the agents with a clear line of sight to the target. Intelligence agencies are naturally secretive. They see no advantage but lots of risk in being transparent. This gives the appearance of hiding something when they are just being overly paranoid. It takes someone with a strong hand to force them to be more transparent. Thankfully Trump has now done that.
-
Question: Does anyone know where this 80,000 number comes from? "Assassination-related" documents? According to the National Archives site, there are about 3000 documents with redactions and about 60 that are withheld in full.
Here's the NARA list of fully withheld documents: https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/withheld-in-full-list
There are another 3000 or so with names blocked out. So this 80,000 is from where?
-
The only one I heard say 80,000 was Trump. :D
For what it's worth
-
Reportedly there's a last minute review being done on about 400-500 of the documents. And the documents include material related to the JFK, RFK, MLK assassinations and "possibly others"? I assume that's Malcolm X?
Link/story: https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-justice-department-orders-national-security-lawyers-review-jfk-documents-2025-03-18/
-
Well . . . you'd think that if there was any scenario the SS should have trained for its was an attack on the POTUS while riding in a convertible down a city street.
-
Well . . . you'd think that if there was any scenario the SS should have trained for its was an attack on the POTUS while riding in a convertible down a city street.
They were hungover from the night before. Clint Hill's account of the shooting and his actions are BS, but he did have guilt about it.
-
Well . . . you'd think that if there was any scenario the SS should have trained for its was an attack on the POTUS while riding in a convertible down a city street.
The secret service of 1963 was nothing like that of today in terms of resources. The agents were older, fewer, and had a much more difficult task protecting the president riding on a preannounced route in an open car. The question was not if but when something like this was going to happen. There was really not much they could have done. They had a few seconds to reach the car and shield JFK. Likely getting killed in the process. They certainly could have done a better job but not likely to change the outcome.
-
That's the endless CTer rabbit hole. The conspiracy can never be proven because someone is covering up the evidence. An endless loop that can never be broken. Like the dogs at the race track forever chasing that rabbit. Even if you want to cling to that, it is still the most investigated criminal case in history. It has been investigated by federal and state law enforcement authorities. They have generated tens of millions pages of documents. Independent "researchers" have investigated the case for decades. This forum alone shows that just about every rock has been turned over searching for answers. Even the pebbles. I can't think of any other case in history that has received so much attention and pedantic nitpicking of every detail.
Is: (1) Image Evidence that The Murder Scene/Dealey Plaza was altered Less than a month after 11/22/63, (2) Image Evidence of a male civilian with a rifle inside this same Murder Scene roughly 30 minutes after the Kill Shot, and, (3) Image Evidence of Curry & Fritz together, (DPD Top Cops), walking this same area, (outside of the TSBD), only days after the assassination, "CTer rabbit hole" material?
-
The secret service of 1963 was nothing like that of today in terms of resources. The agents were older, fewer, and had a much more difficult task protecting the president riding on a preannounced route in an open car. The question was not if but when something like this was going to happen. There was really not much they could have done. They had a few seconds to reach the car and shield JFK. Likely getting killed in the process. They certainly could have done a better job but not likely to change the outcome.
We have guys like Max Holland now getting National Air Time in which they are promoting 10-11+ Seconds for the elapsed time of the 3 shots. There is No Way even back in 1963 that a shooter should be able to consistently fire shots at the POTUS for 10-11+ seconds and there be absolutely No offensive response from the SS. No Way.
-
We have guys like Max Holland now getting National Air Time in which they are promoting 10-11+ Seconds for the elapsed time of the 3 shots. There is No Way even back in 1963 that a shooter should be able to consistently fire shots at the POTUS for 10-11+ seconds and there be absolutely No offensive response from the SS. No Way.
I agree that they could have given a better effort but the circumstances put them in a no-win situation which is why the president no longer rides around in an open car on a preannounced route. Are you saying that they were "in" on the fantasy plot or just ineffective?
-
We have guys like Max Holland now getting National Air Time in which they are promoting 10-11+ Seconds for the elapsed time of the 3 shots. There is No Way even back in 1963 that a shooter should be able to consistently fire shots at the POTUS for 10-11+ seconds and there be absolutely No offensive response from the SS. No Way.
Yes, Way and here's a few reasons why:- It was a well executed ambush from behind and above which took everyone by surprise.
- The sniper was also mostly out of sight behind the boxes.
- Plus the fact that JFK insisted the SS agents not stay on the limo made any attempt to shield him in time very unlikely. We can see Clint Hill's valiant effort on film. But it was too little, too late thanks in large part to JFK's restriction regarding the positions of the SS agents.
The SS was legitimately criticized by the Warren Commission and changes were made. That was one of their main missions so as to try to prevent this type of attack from happening again.
-
(https://i.postimg.cc/bYgW0Nbj/They-re-here.gif)
https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/release-2025
JohnM
-
At least some of them (1,123 documents / 31,419 pages so far).
-
https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/2025/0318/104-10211-10001.pdf?fbclid=IwY2xjawJHKy5leHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHeeln43eSC0-WZ8N2LCpHn7kg6O21qHGqgLOCsVv4QFjkBs4VSNAv0-okw_aem__FVHi3rSPsGrftNjFHjx0g
Notice anything.
-
I agree that they could have given a better effort but the circumstances put them in a no-win situation which is why the president no longer rides around in an open car on a preannounced route. Are you saying that they were "in" on the fantasy plot or just ineffective?
"...could have given a better effort"? Seriously? The SS RAN AWAY. We currently see blue suit PD officers being Fired for Not running into a school and engaging a possible active shooter. And here you are defending the creme-de-la-creme/SS Running Away while a POTUS is under fire for possibly 10-11+ seconds?
-
Yes, Way and here's a few reasons why:- It was a well executed ambush from behind and above which took everyone by surprise.
- The sniper was also mostly out of sight behind the boxes.
- Plus the fact that JFK insisted the SS agents not stay on the limo made any attempt to shield him in time very unlikely. We can see Clint Hill's valiant effort on film. But it was too little, too late thanks in large part to JFK's restriction regarding the positions of the SS agents.
The SS was legitimately criticized by the Warren Commission and changes were made. That was one of their main missions so as to try to prevent this type of attack from happening again.
Chief Rowley gave WC Testimony that SS Agents, (SA Hill included), were hitting the hard stuff in a "beatnik joint" the night before the assassination. None of these Agents were terminated. None. When they are on-the-road with the POTUS, Agents are On Duty 24-7. What job permits downing liquor on-the-clock? Govt Bodies like the SS and CIA are entities that write their own rules and discipline/manage their members. The U.S. Govt did Nothing to reprimand these SS Agents. These Agents were allegedly disciplined "In House". Total BS:
-
https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/2025/0318/104-10211-10001.pdf?fbclid=IwY2xjawJHKy5leHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHeeln43eSC0-WZ8N2LCpHn7kg6O21qHGqgLOCsVv4QFjkBs4VSNAv0-okw_aem__FVHi3rSPsGrftNjFHjx0g
Notice anything.
Dear Tim,
If you're alluding to the heavy redactions, just for giggles check out this file on Ivan Obyedkov which was released many years ago.
Obyedkov's the KGB Security Officer at the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City who "volunteered" to a forgetful Oswald or Oswald impersonator the Department 13-radioactive name "Kostikov" over a sure-to-be-tapped-by-CIA phone line on 1 October 1963.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=157254#relPageId=1&search=201-779495
By the way, did you know that the 835-page file on the Nosenko case from which you posted an excerpt, above, was compiled by my hero, Tennent H. Bagley -- Nosenko's primary CIA case officer from June 1962 to September 1964?
You can read Bagley's 2007 Yale University Press book, "Spy Wars: Moles, Mysteries, and Deadly Games," and his 2014 follow-up article, "Ghosts of the Spy Wars," for free by googling "spy wars" and "archive" simultaneously and "ghosts of the spy wars" and "archive" simultaneously.
And while you're at it, read my Wikipedia article on Bagley, who was on the fast track to becoming Director of CIA before false-defector-in-place-in 1962 and rogue-defector-in-1964 Nosenko physically defected / "defected" to the U.S. in February 1964, telling the CIA and the FBI exactly what the KGB desperately wanted them to hear -- that it had absolutely nothing to do with Oswald during the two-and-one-half years he lived two blocks from a KGB school in Minsk.
-- Tom
-
I looked at several of the files. No index? They should have hired some high school kids to put that together. Most of the ones that I saw had no apparent relevance to the assassination, were indecipherable, were dated decades after the event and/or poor copies making them nearly unreadable. Maybe someone will get through them all eventually and narrow down the relevant files.
-
I checked the news today on what used to be a reputable news site(news.com.au) and is now more of a sensationalized type newspaper but I digress, what was near the top of the page was the following.
The attention getting headline caught my interest.
(https://i.postimg.cc/Z56mM6t2/CIA-responsible-Bombshell-claim-in-JFK-files.jpg)
What followed was just another "nothingburger" Yawn!
(https://i.postimg.cc/zXs570MT/CIA-responsible-Bombshell-claim-in-JFK-files-the-file.jpg)
JohnM
-
I checked the news today on what used to be a reputable news site(news.com.au) and is now more of a sensationalized type newspaper but I digress, what was near the top of the page was the following.
The attention getting headline caught my interest.
(https://i.postimg.cc/Z56mM6t2/CIA-responsible-Bombshell-claim-in-JFK-files.jpg)
What followed was just another "nothingburger" Yawn!
(https://i.postimg.cc/zXs570MT/CIA-responsible-Bombshell-claim-in-JFK-files-the-file.jpg)
JohnM
So the bombshell is a file that mentions an article that was published in a radical left publication in 1967? This is new? Claims made 58 years ago? My guess is that this file was released decades ago. Why withhold it?
Seems the US media, so far (it's early), has been more responsible. Was the Aussie story right next to one about reptilian lizard people secretly controlling the world?
-
So the bombshell is a file that mentions an article that was published in a radical left publication in 1967? This is new? Claims made 58 years ago? My guess is that this file was released decades ago. Why withhold it?
Seems the US media, so far (it's early), has been more responsible. Was the Aussie story right next to one about reptilian lizard people secretly controlling the world?
Was the Aussie story right next to one about reptilian lizard people secretly controlling the world?
Hahahaha! No generally it hasn't sunk to those depths but many a time the click bait headlines don't accurately reflect the content.
JohnM
-
That being your watering hole for "News", explains a lot of your previous positions. How about just finding another watering hole?
-
That being your watering hole for "News", explains a lot of your previous positions. How about just finding another watering hole?
Making assumptions based on assumed facts from limited resources sums up your belief system.
I have access to multiple news sites that I have bookmarked and by cross referencing news across a multitude of sources keeps me up to date.
A small sample in my news folder.
https://www.abc.net.au/
https://www.smh.com.au/
https://www.bbc.com/news
https://www.usnews.com/
https://edition.cnn.com/
https://www.nytimes.com/international/
JohnM
-
I checked the news today on what used to be a reputable news site(news.com.au) and is now more of a sensationalized type newspaper but I digress, what was near the top of the page was the following.
The attention getting headline caught my interest.
(https://i.postimg.cc/Z56mM6t2/CIA-responsible-Bombshell-claim-in-JFK-files.jpg)
What followed was just another "nothingburger" Yawn!
(https://i.postimg.cc/zXs570MT/CIA-responsible-Bombshell-claim-in-JFK-files-the-file.jpg)
JohnM
If the media simply reports that there is nothing much new in the files, no one is going to read their stories. There is also an unfortunate desire on the right to relate the JFK assassination to the "deep state" efforts against Trump. As in they want the CIA and others to have conspired to kill JFK as an example that the "deep state" is out to get presidents. I have no doubt that there was a concerted effort to undermine the Trump administration during his first term. That has no relevance to whether there was a conspiracy involving the highest levels of the government to assassinate JFK. Much of what they are reporting appears to be a product of ignorance. Some of the reports that I saw focused on the fact that the FBI/CIA had been tracking or were "aware" of Oswald before the assassination as though this were new and significant information. Oswald had defected to the USSR and was a known political nut. Of course the FBI/CIA were interested in him for that reason. That is not evidence, however, that they were conspiring with or grooming him for the assassination.
-
If the media simply reports that there is nothing much new in the files, no one is going to read their stories. There is also an unfortunate desire on the right to relate the JFK assassination to the "deep state" efforts against Trump. As in they want the CIA and others to have conspired to kill JFK as an example that the "deep state" is out to get presidents. I have no doubt that there was a concerted effort to undermine the Trump administration during his first term. That has no relevance to whether there was a conspiracy involving the highest levels of the government to assassinate JFK. Much of what they are reporting appears to be a product of ignorance. Some of the reports that I saw focused on the fact that the FBI/CIA had been tracking or were "aware" of Oswald before the assassination as though this were new and significant information. Oswald had defected to the USSR and was a known political nut. Of course the FBI/CIA were interested in him for that reason. That is not evidence, however, that they were conspiring with or grooming him for the assassination.
It's fascinating (like viewing a car accident sort of way) watching the conspiracy Left and conspiracy Right get together on this. It's obvious they loathe one another but their conspiracy crusade forces them to join up, make peace, makes them hold their noses (watch Jefferson Morley on Tucker Carlson or Glenn Beck; he really looks like he wants to be elsewhere). When the MAGA Right says "They got JFK like they tried to get Trump" the conspiracy Left sort of looks the other way, pretends they didn't hear it. JFK, for them, is a saint; he was going to "end" the Cold War and expose the crimes of the "deep state" and CIA. But Trump is the anti-christ, a fascist and there's no way they are going to defend him.
-
So far, most of the documents published have been previously published but with redactions.
We're now seeing unredacted versions of some documents that have previously been released.
As noted by others, not all of the files have been published. Where are the rest?
-
I checked the news today on what used to be a reputable news site(news.com.au) and is now more of a sensationalized type newspaper but I digress, what was near the top of the page was the following.
The attention getting headline caught my interest.
(https://i.postimg.cc/Z56mM6t2/CIA-responsible-Bombshell-claim-in-JFK-files.jpg)
What followed was just another "nothingburger" Yawn!
(https://i.postimg.cc/zXs570MT/CIA-responsible-Bombshell-claim-in-JFK-files-the-file.jpg)
JohnM
Bump regarding SINGLE "NEWS" SOURCE being proffered.
-
Bump regarding SINGLE "NEWS" SOURCE being proffered.
Thanks for bumping my thread and this specific post, and as for your reason for the bump, that is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma!!
JohnM
-
Thanks for bumping my thread and this specific post, and as for your reason for the bump, that is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma!!
JohnM
Good to see that you have emigrated into the Oliver Stone camp. Hope is alive.
-
So far, most of the documents published have been previously published but with redactions.
We're now seeing unredacted versions of some documents that have previously been released.
As noted by others, not all of the files have been published. Where are the rest?
I wonder if anybody has done a systematic comparison to the previous releases to see if if the redactions even made sense at the time?
-
Good to see that you have emigrated into the Oliver Stone camp. Hope is alive.
Well not really, but I do enjoy some of his movies like The Doors, Platoon which was good to see only once and even JFK which even though is full of misinformation, is well made with a great John Williams soundtrack.
JohnM
-
Well not really, but I do enjoy some of his movies like The Doors, Platoon which was good to see only once and even JFK which even though is full of misinformation, is well made with a great John Williams soundtrack.
JohnM
James Horner is my preference by far. A great tragedy when he died crashing his own airplane.
-
If the media simply reports that there is nothing much new in the files, no one is going to read their stories. There is also an unfortunate desire on the right to relate the JFK assassination to the "deep state" efforts against Trump. As in they want the CIA and others to have conspired to kill JFK as an example that the "deep state" is out to get presidents. I have no doubt that there was a concerted effort to undermine the Trump administration during his first term. That has no relevance to whether there was a conspiracy involving the highest levels of the government to assassinate JFK. Much of what they are reporting appears to be a product of ignorance. Some of the reports that I saw focused on the fact that the FBI/CIA had been tracking or were "aware" of Oswald before the assassination as though this were new and significant information. Oswald had defected to the USSR and was a known political nut. Of course the FBI/CIA were interested in him for that reason. That is not evidence, however, that they were conspiring with or grooming him for the assassination.
I would think that these alleged powerful conspirators in the "deep state" would try a sort of lawfare against JFK before shooting him in broad daylight in the middle of the street with 400 people watching? Does that make sense? Even more illogical then have to cover all of that up for half a century. Perhaps try lawfare first: That is leak damaging information on JFK (mistresses, health, make it up) to favored media people. Or blackmail him (recall the letter sent by the FBI to King?). Something easier. Doesn't that make sense?
Clearly there were some - some - in the FBI and elsewhere who used lawfare to try and get Trump. I think they thought they had legitimate reasons. Wouldn't they, in this imaginary situation with JFK, try that first? But instead they went through this absurd plan? Were they idiots?
-
Well not really, but I do enjoy some of his movies like The Doors, Platoon which was good to see only once and even JFK which even though is full of misinformation, is well made with a great John Williams soundtrack.
JohnM
Stone says the Cold War was caused by the West, by US policies and that if we had elected Henry Wallace in 1948 it never would have happened. Poor Joe Stalin never had a chance at peace. I won't even mention the absurdities he says in defense of Putin.
No self-respecting conservative would go within a thousand miles of such nonsense. Stone is a political crackpot. This is another example of how the kook Left and kook Right merge, it's the horseshoe theory of politics. The MAGA Right is much less bad than the woke Left but they are still filled with people (like the bizarro Tucker Carlson) who believe simply foolish things. Like Stone's foolishness.
-
I would think that these alleged powerful conspirators in the "deep state" would try a sort of lawfare against JFK before shooting him in broad daylight in the middle of the street with 400 people watching? Does that make sense? Even more illogical then have to cover all of that up for half a century. Perhaps try lawfare first: That is leak damaging information on JFK (mistresses, health, make it up) to favored media people. Or blackmail him (recall the letter sent by the FBI to King?). Something easier. Doesn't that make sense?
Clearly there were some - some - in the FBI and elsewhere who used lawfare to try and get Trump. I think they thought they had legitimate reasons. Wouldn't they, in this imaginary situation with JFK, try that first? But instead they went through this absurd plan? Were they idiots?
With JFK's brother Bobby running the DOJ, it would have been extremely difficult to even begin using a 1963 Version of "lawfare". The JFK womanizing stuff was generally known back then. I was there, I heard of it 1st hand.
-
It's fascinating (like viewing a car accident sort of way) watching the conspiracy Left and conspiracy Right get together on this. It's obvious they loathe one another but their conspiracy crusade forces them to join up, make peace, makes them hold their noses (watch Jefferson Morley on Tucker Carlson or Glenn Beck; he really looks like he wants to be elsewhere). When the MAGA Right says "They got JFK like they tried to get Trump" the conspiracy Left sort of looks the other way, pretends they didn't hear it. JFK, for them, is a saint; he was going to "end" the Cold War and expose the crimes of the "deep state" and CIA. But Trump is the anti-christ, a fascist and there's no way they are going to defend him.
Dear Steven,
That's just what the KGB* was aiming for by creating, promulgating and encouraging "The CIA Did It!" disinformation for sixty-plus years.
*Today's SVR and FSB
-- Tom
-
Are there websites where you can search the files for keywords and such? Seems like a lot to just wade through.
-
Are there websites where you can search the files for keywords and such? Seems like a lot to just wade through.
I don't think that there are any yet, they will need to use OCR on each page and then catalogue them all which I can't see happening for some time. I have trouble reading some pages so who knows what kind of accuracy we can expect when using OCR?
But it seems like some CT's who have a lot of time on their hands are searching for anything to bolster their case so your best bet is to see what juicy stuff they find and then check their sources, because the rabid CT's are known to bend the truth!
JohnM
-
The Washington Post is reporting some interesting stuff today, but I guess they are slogging through it.
CIA secrets and exposed agents: See unredacted details from the JFK files
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/interactive/2025/jfk-files-assassination-documents
(https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/interactive/2025/jfk-files-assassination-documents)
-
The Washington Post is reporting some interesting stuff today, but I guess they are slogging through it.
CIA secrets and exposed agents: See unredacted details from the JFK files
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/interactive/2025/jfk-files-assassination-documents
(https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/interactive/2025/jfk-files-assassination-documents)
That's the go, "many hands make light work" and just "keep an ear to the ground" and then "the truth will set you free"!
JohnM
-
James Horner is my preference by far. A great tragedy when he died crashing his own airplane.
I have nothing against James Horner except while listening to some of his scores he interchanges a lot of cues from one piece to another. Jerry Goldsmith is high on my list for constantly being original but at the end of the day nothing beats a rousing John Williams soundtrack which perfectly sets the mood and atmosphere and considering his wealth of work he rarely repeats himself!
JohnM
-
I have nothing against James Horner except while listening to some of his scores he interchanges a lot of cues from one piece to another. Jerry Goldsmith is high on my list for constantly being original but at the end of the day nothing beats a rousing John Williams soundtrack which perfectly sets the mood and atmosphere and considering his wealth of work he rarely repeats himself!
JohnM
I like Goldsmith. Prefer "Rudy" if going with only one. If we are picking only 1 movie, I would go with Howard Shore and any of the "Lord Of The Rings". He composed a lot of different themes for each character along with The Shire, the Battles etc. Phenomenal work. Regarding Horner, Williams has nothing close to "Glory". Horner vs Williams is like comparing Lennon to McCartney. Extremely different composers.
-
Pandoras Box.
-
Pandoras Box.
Wowie zowie!
-
I like Goldsmith. Prefer "Rudy" if going with only one. If we are picking only 1 movie, I would go with Howard Shore and any of the "Lord Of The Rings". He composed a lot of different themes for each character along with The Shire, the Battles etc. Phenomenal work. Regarding Horner, Williams has nothing close to "Glory". Horner vs Williams is like comparing Lennon to McCartney. Extremely different composers.
Howard Shore has been on my radar ever since he played in Hamburg in the underground clubs, no sorry that was the Rolling Stones, no, no that was another band that's currently eluding me! Anyway being a David Cronenberg fan, I was impressed with the Howard Shore scores to his early 80's movies like Scanners, Videodrome and a little later The Fly. And it's been interesting following Shore as he went on to bigger but not necessarily better movies and yeah, his Lord of the Rings soundtrack fits the movie pretty well.
BTW I listened to excerpts to the "Glory" music and it's fine, if not a bit derivative and generic.
JohnM
-
More files were added last night:
March 20, 2025 - 9:30 PM EST Release: 13,700 pages (161 PDF files)
-
Howard Shore has been on my radar ever since he played in Hamburg in the underground clubs, no sorry that was the Rolling Stones, no, no that was another band that's currently eluding me! Anyway being a David Cronenberg fan, I was impressed with the Howard Shore scores to his early 80's movies like Scanners, Videodrome and a little later The Fly. And it's been interesting following Shore as he went on to bigger but not necessarily better movies and yeah, his Lord of the Rings soundtrack fits the movie pretty well.
BTW I listened to excerpts to the "Glory" music and it's fine, if not a bit derivative and generic.
JohnM
If you have Not watched the "Glory" (1989) movie, I recommend you do so. Has early Denzel and Morgan Freeman starring in it. Matching the Horner score with the on-screen images displays Horner at his best.
-
Thank god for the Mary Ferrell foundation. They are working on organizing and indexing the new files.
-
Why in the world would anyone in their right (pardon the pun) mind watch Fox?
-
I was just over at the Ed Forum to see if anyone has found anything of any worth within the released files and as predicted, there's nothing in the files. But what is interesting, is a new thread about Trump, who believes that Oswald did it and the reaction is hilarious, they're having an absolute hissy fit and even though they haven't got a clue, they're saying that Trump couldn't possibly know the case, I mean how dare anyone rely on Rock Solid Evidence, it's a travesty I tell ya! Hahaha!
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-reveals-who-he-thinks-killed-jfk-after-releasing-assassination-investigation-files/ar-AA1BvisM?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=DCTS&cvid=5f43e341b78c451a8756e3de7cacf5ad&ei=11
JohnM
-
You Old Timey JFK Assassination Researchers laugh all the time, but that just reveals a "flat earth" mentality. And we know how that turned out. I personally have made 2 JFK Assassination Discoveries over the last several months. One within the last few weeks. Both are ground breaking. A possible 3rd is currently going through the rinse cycle. There IS new evidence out there. But you gotta value knowing the truth over being proven wrong.
-
You Old Timey JFK Assassination Researchers laugh all the time, but that just reveals a "flat earth" mentality. And we know how that turned out. I personally have made 2 JFK Assassination Discoveries over the last several months. One within the last few weeks. Both are ground breaking. A possible 3rd is currently going through the rinse cycle. There IS new evidence out there. But you gotta value knowing the truth over being proven wrong.
Good old king of the Blue Collar worker, Trump, believes that Oswald assassinated President John F. Kennedy! How do you like them apples!
When asked if he believed Oswald was the one who killed Kennedy – a conclusion rebuked by some conspiracy theorists – Trump responded, “I do.” “I do and I’ve always felt that,” the president said.
JohnM
-
Good old king of the Blue Collar worker, Trump, believes that Oswald assassinated President John F. Kennedy! How do you like them apples!
When asked if he believed Oswald was the one who killed Kennedy – a conclusion rebuked by some conspiracy theorists – Trump responded, “I do.” “I do and I’ve always felt that,” the president said.
JohnM
What will the new narrative be, when Congress finds Oswald was one of other shooters?
Trump says Oswald was ‘helped’ in JFK assassination
https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/5209904-trump-oswald-was-helped-jfk-assassination/
-
What we see above is what has plagued this Unsolved Murder from Day 1 forward. Accepting the "1/2 Truths" the Fake News'ers provide will lead to an inaccurate conclusion.
-
What we see above is what has plagued this Unsolved Murder from Day 1 forward. Accepting the "1/2 Truths" the Fake News'ers provide will lead to an inaccurate conclusion.
Whereas you, Storing, obviously prefer KGB* disinformation.
On everything.
*Today's SVR and FSB
-
What will the new narrative be, when Congress finds Oswald was one of other shooters?
Trump says Oswald was ‘helped’ in JFK assassination
https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/5209904-trump-oswald-was-helped-jfk-assassination/
Trump says Oswald was ‘helped’ in JFK assassination
The article I posted from the MSN article differs to the article that you posted from The Hill, it's only 2 words interchanged and a missing question mark, which changes the question Trump asked in the MSN quote into a statement of apparent fact from Trump's quote in The Hill??
MSN: Trump left the door open for other theories asking, “Of course, was he helped?”
The Hill: Trump replied. “Of course he was … helped.”
EDIT
The MSN got it right!
@10:34 “Of course, was he helped?”
JohnM
-
Like I said. You're being Spoon fed FAKE NEWS and simply repeating it = rubber stamping it. Leave the Echo Chamber and do the work/research. Take NOTHING at face value.
-
The article I posted from the MSN article differs to the article that you posted from The Hill, it's only 2 words interchanged and a missing question mark, which changes the question Trump asked in the MSN quote into a statement of apparent fact from Trump's quote in The Hill??
MSN: Trump left the door open for other theories asking, “Of course, was he helped?”
The Hill: Trump replied. “Of course he was … helped.”
EDIT
The MSN got it right!
@10:34 “Of course, was he helped?”
JohnM
Thumb1:
-
The article I posted from the MSN article differs to the article that you posted from The Hill, it's only 2 words interchanged and a missing question mark, which changes the question Trump asked in the MSN quote into a statement of apparent fact from Trump's quote in The Hill??
MSN: Trump left the door open for other theories asking, “Of course, was he helped?”
The Hill: Trump replied. “Of course he was … helped.”
EDIT
The MSN got it right!
@10:34 “Of course, was he helped?”
JohnM
What will the new narrative be, when Congress finds Oswald was one of other shooters?
Public Hearings begin April 1st
-
The article I posted from the MSN article differs to the article that you posted from The Hill, it's only 2 words interchanged and a missing question mark, which changes the question Trump asked in the MSN quote into a statement of apparent fact from Trump's quote in The Hill??
MSN: Trump left the door open for other theories asking, “Of course, was he helped?”
The Hill: Trump replied. “Of course he was … helped.”
EDIT
The MSN got it right!
@10:34 “Of course, was he helped?”
JohnM
Dear John,
You almost got it right.
If you'll listen to the interview very, very closely, you'll realize that Trump caught himself.
In reply to the question, "Do you think Oswald killed JFK, personally?", he says, "Uh, I do, and I've always felt that. Of course, he was . . . was he helped?"
-- Tom
-
Dear John,
You almost got it right.
If you'll listen to the interview very, very closely, you'll realize that Trump caught himself.
In reply to the question, "Do you think Oswald killed JFK, personally?", he says, "Uh, I do, and I've always felt that. Of course, he was . . . was he helped?"
-- Tom
Thumb1:
-
Good old king of the Blue Collar worker, Trump, believes that Oswald assassinated President John F. Kennedy! How do you like them apples!
When asked if he believed Oswald was the one who killed Kennedy – a conclusion rebuked by some conspiracy theorists – Trump responded, “I do.” “I do and I’ve always felt that,” the president said.
JohnM
What a refreshing change that it is for a politician to give an honest answer (whether you like the answer or not) instead of hedging and having a team of advisors put together bullet points to guide them. Trump gives an honest opinion - most often correct but sometimes wrong - instead of struggling to figure out what he should say to improve his political standing or not make a gaff. Kamala was the worst. She apparently had enough self-realization to understand that she couldn't speak off the cuff without making a fool of herself. Unfortunatly, there was no plan B for her.
-
People need to factor in how Poorly/Clumsily the question was worded, along with Trump possibly Not hearing/understanding the question as it was worded. In general, Trump is a Conspiracy Guy. He likes the intrique that comes with it. Dating back, we saw this with Trump referencing Ted Cruz's dad allegedly having a JFK Assassination connection. You gotta know the man, you gotta know recent and past History to fully comprehend the action(s)/words of one or many.
-
If Dorothy Garner followed Adams and Stiles at 30 secs post shots when they left the 4th floor office then the only way that the 6th floor shooter at the SE window of TSBD could get past Garner unseen would be to have an accomplice take the shooter down using the East elevator.
Accomplice operates elevator To the 2nd floor. The shooter exits into storage room and accomplice returns east elevator to the 5th floor by 75 sec post shots.
The best accomplice would be another TSBD employee which avoids suspicion being a stranger in the building.
What other TSBD employees had no alibi at the time of the shooting?
1.Geneva Hines on the 2nd floor
2.Eddie Piper 1st floor
3.Jack Dougherty 5th and 6th floor
The combo of Oswald as shooter and Dougherty as accomplice would be an easy way to get Oswald to the 2nd floor lunchroom by 55 sec post shots, and Dougherty returning east elevator to the 5th floor by 75 sec post shots.
This is probably the most minimal of scenarios for an “Oswald had help “ conspiracy theory.
-
If Dorothy Garner followed Adams and Stiles [sic] at 30 secs post shots when they left the 4th floor office . . .
Followed them where?
To the Roach Coach lunch truck parked outside?
-
Garner claimed she followed behind Adam’s and Stiles “almost immediately” as they left the 4th floor office. But she clarified in her interview with Barry Ernest that she did not actually see them go down the stars (as per her original statement in the Belin memo,) but that she did HEAR them when she walked over to the staircase and stood looking out the west window nearest the staircase.
To be able to hear 2 girls on the stairs , heels clacking , voices , or whatever noise it was that Garner heard that made her think it was more than just 1 person on the stairs, means that Garner most likely exited the office approx. 30 sec post shots , walked the next 60 ft in about 10 secs and thus was near the staircase by 40 sec post shots.
To make it work with Oswald as a shooter who wipes prints off the rifle and hides it in the boxes requires about 40 secs total before he could start down the staircase, and eith the fastest probable speed of running down stairs skipping 3 steps at a time and crossing 20 ft floor landing =10sec/floor, Oswald would not be going down the 4th floor stair until 60 sec post shots.
So unless there is any other statement that Garner made that suggests she thought that at least 65 secs elapsed before she exited the office , then the only way Oswald could have gotten past her unseen would be to take the east elevator.
Tom, I hope you will pardon my not so precise English grammar and offer an opinion of how probable it is that Garner would describe a 65 secs span of time as “almost immediately”.
-
Tom, I hope you will pardon my not so precise English grammar . . .
I'm trying.
Good Lord, I'm trying.
. . . and offer an opinion of how probable it is that Garner would describe a 65 secs [sic] span of time as “almost immediately”.
I don't know if your premises are correct, but in answer to your question I would say, "Works for me!"
Regarding your statement that Garner must have been near the staircase 40 seconds after the last shot, does your estimate take into consideration the fact she spoke for a while with Adams and Styles in her office (iirc)?
What makes you think Oswald wiped his prints off his short-rifle given the fact that the wood was so rough that it wouldn't "take" a print and given the fact that his prints were found on the trigger guard?
-
Question: Why were the social security numbers, some of them for people still alive, released in these latest JFK files released by Trump?
Question: Is it possible that the social security number of everyone involved in the research of the JFK assassination will someday be released by Trump?
Question: Could some of us who post on this forum have their social security numbers published in order to release all information that may be related to the JFK assassination?
-
Question: Why were the social security numbers, some of them for people still alive, released in these latest JFK files released by Trump?
Question: Is it possible that the social security number of everyone involved in the research of the JFK assassination will someday be released by Trump?
Question: Could some of us who post on this forum have their social security numbers published in order to release all information that may be related to the JFK assassination?
Question: Have you always been paranoiac?
-
Question: Have you always been paranoiac?
I think the people who had their social security numbers published are not paranoid but are really pissed off.
Question: Why did Trump have the social security numbers of these people released to the public?
-
So, when is Trump going to release the Epstein files? I don't need the social security numbers but the rest of the information would be good to have.
Question: What is Trump trying to hide?
-
I think the people who had their social security numbers published are not paranoid but are really pissed off.
Question: Why did Trump have the social security numbers of these people released to the public?
Do you think The Traitorous Orange Bird personally chose whose Social Security numbers to release?
-
Do you think The Traitorous Orange Bird personally chose whose Social Security numbers to release?
No. It is just a sign of his incompetent administration. He declares the files must be released immediately. And no one dares question his judgment less they get fired. In a normal administration, the advisors would feel confident that they could point out errors without fear of being fired. But Trump wants 'Yes-men', not competent advisors. Any president will make misjudgments and needs advisors who are not afraid to contradict him. No wonder he drove so many businesses into bankruptcy and needed the courts to bail him out time and time again.
-
No disrespect intended, but in the video, when President Trump said “it’s going to be very interesting”, I couldn’t help but be reminded of Colonel Klink in the classic TV series “Hogan’s Heroes” and his “verrry interesting” saying.
That was Arte Johnson on Laugh In.
-
Question: Why were the social security numbers, some of them for people still alive, released in these latest JFK files released by Trump?
Question: Is it possible that the social security number of everyone involved in the research of the JFK assassination will someday be released by Trump?
Question: Could some of us who post on this forum have their social security numbers published in order to release all information that may be related to the JFK assassination?
Imagine criticizing Trump who did something no other president would do in releasing these files because they contained a few social security numbers of dead people. LOL. That is classic TDS.
-
By my count, there are 143 files in the latest release that are nothing more than HSCA payroll records with SSNs. Several have long lists of such. These files are of no interest to anyone. Many others are numerous investigatory files on individuals that have no connection to anything and on whom nothing was found.
The release shows the usual crassness, incompetence, and lack of care that characterizes this travesty of a mal-Administration.
-
Transparency. CTers complained for years about the files not being released. Now they are complaining because they were. There's no winning. If Trump invented a cure for cancer, some people would complain that he was contributing to overpopulation and global warming.