JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate => Topic started by: Lance Payette on April 24, 2025, 10:34:39 PM
-
Since I had zero expectations, I slept through all the brouhaha. However, I saw a post at the Ed Forum today where a longtime CTer questioned whether anything significant had been revealed. This caused me to check Google and Bing and whatnot for news stories, and there has been pretty much nothing since Luna's hearing. The coverage of the hearing itself seems to have been in the vein that it was more of a goofy sideshow than anything serious. If anything has piqued the interest of serious historians, I sure didn't see it.
Yes, this could be because the MSM is in the pocket of the CIA, but on the other hand the MSM being in the pocket of the CIA could just be a convenient excuse for the fact that no one seems very excited now that all the promised bombshells have gone poof.
In a related development, the Ed Forum these days seems to be more focused on dark suspicion about Operation Mockingbird, cognitive infiltration, 9/11 and whatnot than anything directly JFKA-related. Founder John Simkin is once again posting and revealing himself to be considerably more in the dark and spooky vein than I had realized. It's quite boring.
It's enough to make enquiring minds ask: Is JFKA conspiracy theorizing on the wane, on a downhill slide toward oblivion? Will a 97-year-old Jefferson Morley be drooling into his porridge about "unreleased records" in 2048 with no one listening? (Morley mentioned just a couple of days ago that his substack newsletter has 20,000 subscribers, which he apparently thinks is evidence of great interest. A friend of mine who is a UFO luminary has at least ten times that. Something called "Letters from an American" has 1.3 million, while "Lenny's Newsletter," whatever that is, has 593,000.)
Concerned, CTers? Surely you had high hopes for the JFK records release, did you not? More to the point, is my $147 stipend from Langley in jeopardy? Are the DOGE folks going to start taking a hard look at whether cognitive infiltrators like me are really needed anymore?
Former FBI analyst Farris Rookstool III, who is now an award-winning professional historian, gives his take on the records release at his site and says, "While these documents do not conclusively prove a conspiracy, they highlight intelligence failures, bureaucratic missteps, and the continued complexity surrounding JFK’s assassination." https://farrisrookstool.com/2025-jfk-records When he gets into substance, it sounds to me like nothing we didn't pretty much already know, certainly nothing that is going to move the needle of history.
"Do not conclusively prove a conspiracy" sounds to me like Rookstool-speak for "nothing new, I wish I'd kept my mouth shut."
Is there anything you are actually excited about, CTers, or can I go back to sleep?
-
Most of the recently released files were previously released with redactions. While it's good to see the unredacted files, there isn't a ton of new information so far.
From what I understand, the files that most people want to see, are still being withheld (ie the Bill Harvey, David Atlee Philips, and George Joannides files).
The most interesting JFK related document for me was the Schlessinger memo. It gives insight into how the Kennedy administration viewed the CIA in the aftermath of the Bay of Pigs.
There's some interesting non-JFK assassination related stuff about James Angelton and CIA operations around the world.
It's not a "dud" unless you had the expectation that there's a "smoking gun" hidden in the JFK files. I doubt there is a smoking gun in the government files but there likely are some interesting pieces of information that shed light on some mysteries.
-
Most of the recently released files were previously released with redactions. While it's good to see the unredacted files, there isn't a ton of new information so far.
From what I understand, the files that most people want to see, are still being withheld (ie the Bill Harvey, David Atlee Philips, and George Joannides files).
The most interesting JFK related document for me was the Schlessinger memo. It gives insight into how the Kennedy administration viewed the CIA in the aftermath of the Bay of Pigs.
There's some interesting non-JFK assassination related stuff about James Angelton and CIA operations around the world.
It's not a "dud" unless you had the expectation that there's a "smoking gun" hidden in the JFK files. I doubt there is a smoking gun in the government files but there likely are some interesting pieces of information that shed light on some mysteries.
OK, that's a rational and realistic perspective, but don't you think most people thought (and had been led to believe) there was going to be something BIG?
Do you think it's realistic to believe the sort of conspiracy theorizing that has gone on for 60+ years will continue indefinitely, or is it right on the edge of fading away?
It reminds me of the seemingly endless hysteria within the evangelical Christian community over an imminent Rapture by Jesus (or Second Coming, if the Rapture isn't part of your theology). It was at a fever pitch when I was in college in 1970, and it's at a fever pitch once again. I think you can only play the imminent Rapture card so many times. If it hasn't happened in the next 50 years, it's going to become a tough sell.
-
OK, that's a rational and realistic perspective, but don't you think most people thought (and had been led to believe) there was going to be something BIG?
As with the Jeffrey Epstein files, I think most people are now resigned to the fact that any documents that the government doesn't want the public to see will never voluntarily be disclosed to the public.
Many people on the internet were disappointed with the way the Trump administration handled the Epstein files. In contrast, I haven't seen the same levels of disappointment on the JFK files.
Do you think it's realistic to believe the sort of conspiracy theorizing that has gone on for 60+ years will continue indefinitely, or is it right on the edge of fading away?
It will continue indefinitely because the facts of the JFK assassination leave a lot of room for speculation but I think as time goes on, interest in the Kennedy assassination will decline regardless.
There's too much going on in the world today for most people to care about a cold case from 60+ years ago. At least that's what I hear sometimes from younger people.
-
There's too much going on in the world today for most people to care about a cold case from 60+ years ago. At least that's what I hear sometimes from younger people.
Yes, the JFKA conspiracy community does comprise a large percentage of Old White Men (hey, that's me) with a nostalgic, rose-colored view of JFK (hey, that's not me, although I certainly would have preferred that he lived to a ripe old age).
For someone who is 20 today, the JFKA would be to him or her like an event that had occurred in 1908 would have been to me when I was 20 - pretty ancient history, and the world moves WAY faster now than when I was 20. Hence the effort, I believe, on the part of the Old White Men to make the JFKA seem as though it's still highly relevant to the world of today, which I don't think it is at all.
Maybe I'll start a James Garfield assassination community and see if I can interest some Really Old White Men.
-
It will continue indefinitely because the facts of the JFK assassination leave a lot of room for speculation but I think as time goes on, interest in the Kennedy assassination will decline regardless.
...and the great majority of people will simply believe that there definitely was a conspiracy (but won't be prepared to look into it).
-
...and the great majority of people will simply believe that there definitely was a conspiracy (but won't be prepared to look into it).
And many who believe the LN conclusion will continue to ignore any new evidence that casts doubt on that narrative. That's called "Confirmation Bias".
-
And many who believe the LN conclusion will continue to ignore any new evidence that casts doubt on that narrative. That's called "Confirmation Bias".
And what is in these files that the LN side is ignoring? That's the original question, the latest release.
We've been told for years, more than two decades, by the likes of Morley and others that they contain evidence of the conspiracy. "Why else would they be holding them?" went the claim. "Release the Joannides files. That will show that Oswald was used in a counter intelligence operation." So they were released - all of them now - and just as the people who saw they said there's nothing there. Yet people will go back to Morley or some other conspiracist for their conspiracy fix, for another claim, for something you can use to express your grievances against the CIA or for the MAGA right the "deep state."
Everything the conspiracy side has asked for has been answered. Every time. But they not only won't take no for an answer, they won't take yes either.
Again what confirmation bias is being shown here by the lone assassin crowd? I see a lot of bias on the conspiracy side. I don't see any here on the lone gunman side on this matter.
-
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.
-
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
-
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.
-
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
-
Who would have thought ten years ago that the JFK files, complete with social security numbers, would be released before Epstein files were.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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!!!
Dude, the JFK assassination was over 60 years ago. Should there be no expiration date for how long the government can keep secrets?
Honest question.
I'm a true believer in government transparency and find it perplexing that some Americans don't support government transparency. Public officials are more honest when they know the stuff they do in secret might eventually be revealed to the public.
If that's your attitude on government transparency, then you deserve a corrupt President like Trump.
Equating JFKA secrecy and UFO secrecy is a bit weird. Only Shellenberger seemed to have any clue what he was talking about.
Michael Shellenberger seemed to be the most interested in the UFO stuff and he admitted that he's not as well versed on the JFK assassination as Morley and Larry Scnapf.
In the big picture, I too support government transparency on the UFO/UAP stuff too (although I have doubts that there's as much substance in the UFO stuff).
Shellenberger also mentioned the Epstein files.
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.
The thing is, most Americans, at least 2/3's, are already convinced that there was a conspiracy in the Kennedy assassination and that the government is covering it up.
Most of the damage is already done so far as the decline of public trust in the government and institutions like the traditional news media.
No one seriously believes anyone will be held accountable for conspiring to kill JFK. But the lack of trust in the government and the media paved the way for a conspiratorial politician like Trump to become President of the USA.
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.
Don't overthink it. Maybe you don't care about government transparency but millions of Americans DO care and that's why people like Morley and Shellenberger have big enough audiences to earn a decent living as independent journalists.
-
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.
Well, you're going right down the path Morley would like you to go.
BTW, the FOIA is riddled with so many protections for the government that it's scarcely an Open Sesame for secrets.
Think about it: Politicians come and go, and a large percentage are incompetent fools with no qualifications for the positions to which they are elected. Ditto for their appointees. Would you really want Bill Clinton, Dubya, Old Joe, The Donald or The Kamala privy to everything the intelligence agencies know? Would you really want the public privy to it? You WOULD?
I have no problem at all with professional, career intelligence types - or even other agency types - making a judgment call and saying, "No, The Donald isn't going to be in office in four years and he simply can't be trusted with THAT. What he might do with THAT is potentially too damaging. THAT will not be disclosed to him unless it becomes critical for him to know it in order to avoid a catastrophically bad decision."
Regardless of whether I have a problem with it, it's what happens all the time and always will.
-
Think about it: Politicians come and go, and a large percentage are incompetent fools with no qualifications for the positions to which they are elected. Ditto for their appointees. Would you really want Bill Clinton, Dubya, Old Joe, The Donald or The Kamala privy to everything the intelligence agencies know? Would you really want the public privy to it? You WOULD?
Under most circumstances, the public doesn't have a "need" to know about classified or top secret programs or operations that are happening now or very recently.
But there are few good reasons for keeping government secrets for decades as we've seen with the JFK files.
For example, despite it being widely assumed that the CIA overthrew Iran's President in 1953, it took about 50 years for the CIA to officially open their records on that operation. Why?
I'm aware that the US government has an over-classification problem. So the majority of government secrets aren't really "secrets" I assume. The same can be said of many of the recently published JFK files. Most arguably are unremarkable and didn't necessarily need to be kept secret this long.
But on the otherhand, there's also the problem of government agencies and the White House keeping secrets for political reasons, not legit national security reasons. Presidents and government agencies don't like to be embarrassed and forced to answer difficult questions.
We saw that during the Obama administration after the Snowden leaks. He revealed how extensive and illegal the NSA's domestic surveillance programs were. And exposed as liars the Obama administration, after they denied that mass domestic surveillance was happening.
Regardless of whether I have a problem with it, it's what happens all the time and always will.
And passive attitudes like yours are why America's democracy is being stress-tested by someone like Trump.
If politicians and government agencies can evade accountability, we'll see more government corruption, not less.
-
And passive attitudes like yours are why America's democracy is being stress-tested by someone like Trump.
If politicians and government agencies can evade accountability, we'll see more government corruption, not less.
How do we square your attitude with The Donald's orders for massive quantities of records to be released?
Show me a CTer with TDS and I'll show you a three-legged chicken that moos like a cow! Shouldn't The Donald be your hero?
Are you aware - I posted it here somewhere - that the last World War ONE records were declassified by the CIA in something like 2011 and that millions of World War TWO records are still classified by various agencies? I have no idea why, but I have some level of trust that the agencies know what they are doing.
(From my earlier post: "I just happened to be reading a 1991 memo from the National Archivist (Wilson) to the FBI Director (Sessions) concerning classified World War Two records. He explained that more the 27,000,000 pages remained classified. In just the previous year, some 10,270,000 pages were declassified – but more than that were added. Thousands and thousands of cubic feet remained at the CIA, FBI, DOJ, Army, Navy and numerous other agencies. He described the Archives’ task as essentially impossible.")
What people like Morley are all about is what we lawyers call "fishing expeditions." He really has no idea what he's after, or whether it relates to the JFKA, but by God he'll find some "good stuff" and make hay with it in furtherance of his unrestricted transparency agenda. That's pretty much how government transparency should not work. Hey, I want all the records related to the neutron bomb so I can make one in my basement or maybe sell them to North Korea. I mean, come on, the neutron bomb was developed before JFK was assassinated!
Your attitude reminds of the hippie era, which I lived through in my bellbottoms and beads. The hippie attitudes were laudable utopian fantasies. When the hippie leaders realized they were fantasies, they became Wall Street investment counselors.
-
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.
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.
Nowhere did I say or ever have said don't hold the government accountable. Every time we've discussed these files I said release them all. Let them out with the proviso that nobody's life was endangered, e.g., mob informants.
Again: release them. Release Harvey's files. Release Joannides' files. And if there's evidence of criminality hold them accountable (although they are all long dead). But if they don't show criminality hold the people who accused them of criminality accountable too. Democracy isn't just about holding the government accountable; it's about holding our institutions and the people in them accountable too. Like the media.
So here we are and they are all out and all of the conspiracy claims over the years by people like Morley about what they are hiding have shown to be wrong. Let's be clear here on what he is doing: He accuses people of murdering JFK, of conspiracy to murder, of framing Oswald, of obstruction of justice, of perjury. Essentially he says Angleton and Joannides and whatever latest name pops into his head of treason. Murder and treason. And he said there's evidence for this in the files and their release would show it. He didn't suggest it. He explicitly said it. Well, they were released and it doesn't show it.
If you don't care whether he's reckless because his motives are good then fine. I think otherwise. I don't think accusing people of murder is something to be waved away. It's a serious charge. And he doesn't take it seriously. You want to hold Posner accountable but not Morley. I say both should be. Morley testified before Congress as some sort of expert. He's quoted and cited in the news media. This is not some person simply posting on the internet.
As to the suppression of files or information and your claim about hiding something: These were suppressed/redacted over the decades. And now have been released in full. You can go back and see the original redacted or fully withheld files and the later unredacted and released ones. There was nothing sinister or criminal withheld. The claim that the only reason they could have been withheld is because of something sinister has been proven wrong.
The fact that the only reason you could think they were withheld is because they indicate something illegal or wrong is really an indictment on your thinking, Jon. That's the confirmation bias you mentioned. And it's what Morley has been doing for years.
-
So here we are and they are all out and all of the conspiracy claims over the years by people like Morley about what they are hiding have shown to be wrong. Let's be clear here on what he is doing: He accuses people of murdering JFK, of conspiracy to murder, of framing Oswald, of obstruction of justice, of perjury. Essentially he says Angleton and Joannides and whatever latest name pops into his head of treason. Murder and treason. And he said there's evidence for this in the files and their release would show it. He didn't suggest it. He explicitly said it. Well, they were released and it doesn't show it.
Obstruction of investigations and perjury? Yes.
Murder and treason? No. I haven't heard Morley directly accuse any CIA officers of "murder" or "treason".
Please explain what Morley is wrong about on the obstruction and perjury accusations?
Even the CIA's historian admitted years ago that they covered up some things related to the JFK assassination, which is a form of obstruction. Do you reject the CIA's limited hangout?
Furthermore,
- Were Dick Helms and Angleton truthful when they denied that Oswald was the subject of CIA operations prior to 11/22/63? No in my opinion based on the documents.
- Should George Joannides have disclosed his relationship with Carlos Bringuer and the DRE to the HSCA? Yes in my opinion based on the documents.
I don't think accusing people of murder is something to be waved away. It's a serious charge.
Please cite specifically what you're referring to. I can't recall Morley doing what you're accusing him doing.
The fact that the only reason you could think they were withheld is because they indicate something illegal or wrong is really an indictment on your thinking, Jon.
I've never said that's the "only" possible reason. I'm open to other possible reasons.
But the anti-transparency crowd have run out of good excuses for rationalizing keeping most of these secrets after 60+ years.
-
Jeff Morley's update on the JFK files as we reach Trump's 100th day in office:
What Trump Wrought
The March 18 release was the biggest breakthrough in JFK transparency since the JFK Records Act releases in the 1990s.
Back in 2023, I dubbed Arthur Schlesinger Jr.’s memo to JFK about the CIA, “the most important blank page” in the JFK files. When fully released for the first time on March 18, the Schlesinger Memo lived up to its billing. A long-censored passage documented the CIA’s “encroachment” on the president’s foreign policy authority as well as French suspicions that the CIA had plotted against President Charles de Gaulle.
Angleton’s Role
A newly declassified 1958 memo revealed Angleton’s purpose in putting Oswald, a 20-year-old ex-Marine, under mail surveillance in 1959. Angleton’s full 1975 testimony to the Church Committee disclosed how the deep-thinking spy chief deployed Israeli agents in U.S. intelligence operations, possibly including Reuben Efron, the CIA operations officer who read Oswald’s mail for the first 18 months of JFK’s presidency. And the release of Angleton’s 1978 testimony to the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) showed he lied about his surveillance of Oswald.
Key JFK Documents Still Unreleased
While most of the JFK records that federal agencies had previously turned over to the National Archives appear to have been released, other assassination-related records still in the possession of the agencies have not.
George Joannides’ personnel file remains “denied in full.” Joannides was a Miami-based undercover officer who played a double role in the JFK story. The 44 documents in his personnel file relate to the “intelligence methods” and “cover” (false identity) that he used in 1963. Joannides’ agents in the top-secret AMSPELL program generated propaganda about Oswald before and after Kennedy’s assassination. Fifteen years later, in 1978, Joannides was called out of retirement to serve as the Agency’s liaison to the House Select Committee on Assassinations. He then stonewalled investigators about his knowledge of Oswald.
Footnote: A newly disclosed organizational chart of the Miami station in 1963 shows the staffing of the CA (covert action) branch, which was headed by Joannides when his agents had contact with Oswald in the summer of 1963.
Miami Stories
A secret JFK investigation conducted by the CIA’s Miami station in 1963-64 remains largely out of view. As first disclosed in 2017, top station officials did not believe the story of a “lone gunman.” They ordered case officers to question their anti-Castro sources about possible Cuban involvement in the assassination.
JFK researchers are still seeking the Situation Reports (SITREPS) submitted by the officers in the probe, which reportedly lasted for much of 1964. The CIA has not yet produced any documents related to its internal JFK inquiry.
Nor has the CIA turned over the travel records of William K. Harvey, the chief of the Agency’s assassination program in 1963 and a good friend of Mafia boss Johnny Rosselli, who was involved in a CIA plot to kill Castro.
Trump’s Interim Grade
In sum, Trump has largely delivered on JFK files previously turned over to the Assassination Records Review Board and the National Archives while failing to obtain outstanding documents still in the possession of the CIA, FBI, Department of Defense, and Kennedy family.
For sweeping away thousands of unjustifiable redactions, Trump has torn much of the veil of secrecy from the historical record of JFK’s assassination. But the job is not yet done. In danger of failing six weeks after his executive order, Trump now deserves credit for substantial progress, though significant challenges remain.
Interim grade: B-minus.
Link - https://jfkfacts.substack.com/p/trumps-interim-grade-on-jfk-files
-
Jeff Morley's update on the JFK files as we reach Trump's 100th day in office:
Link - https://jfkfacts.substack.com/p/trumps-interim-grade-on-jfk-files
IMHO, your "Jeff" Morley is a virtual (if not actual) KGB* agent.
As is anyone who rigorously defends false-defector-in-place-in-Geneva-in-1962 / rogue-physical-defector-to-the-US-in-1964 Yuri Nosenko.
*Today's SVR and FSB
-
Great video clip from the Solving JFK Podcast