nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

JFK Files

GM228

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/921716470140325889

So Trump will open up the JFK files (how nice of him as they were legally to be declassified next week anyway), is it a diversion and would anything in them really surprise us do we think?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Itssoeasy

branie2 wrote: »

Bit of a long shot question, but has anyone here ever read the Warren Report?

I've read bits of it.

DEFTLEFTHAND

MadYaker wrote: »

Trump isn't trying to claim credit for this, read Trumps own tweet on it. All he said was he will be allowing the scheduled declasification to go ahead, he could stop it if he wanted to. I'm all in favour of bashing Trump but what you've said above is inaccurate. If you start using half truths and taking things out of context to imply a different meaning then were no better than Trump and his idiot supporters.

I wonder how much of these files will be redacted?

I suspect Trump is hoping this will distract the media and everyone else from the other failings of his administration, specifically the controversy surrounding Niger. I also think that the CIA probably don't want this info to be declassified so Trump sees it as a good way to put the boot into them.

I agree with most of this apart from the bit in bold.

Be careful with your wording. You can't describe 50+ million people as "idiots". You're falling into the same trap Hilary did with her bizarre "basket of deplorables" statement. Lesson must be learned from the last election, Democrats can't afford to further alienate the working classes.

Unity needs to be sought in the USA.

This goes for the other side also. Respectful debate should be encouraged.

Ipso

MadYaker wrote: »

Trump isn't trying to claim credit for this, read Trumps own tweet on it. All he said was he will be allowing the scheduled declasification to go ahead, he could stop it if he wanted to. I'm all in favour of bashing Trump but what you've said above is inaccurate. If you start using half truths and taking things out of context to imply a different meaning then were no better than Trump and his idiot supporters.

I wonder how much of these files will be redacted?

I suspect Trump is hoping this will distract the media and everyone else from the other failings of his administration, specifically the controversy surrounding Niger. I also think that the CIA probably don't want this info to be declassified so Trump sees it as a good way to put the boot into them.

Because the anti Trump brigade is a bastion of sophistication, lucidity and pure facts.

Ipso

Hector Savage wrote: »

Co-incidentally I just watched JFK this weekend, In that Jim Garrison (Kevin Costner) mentions that these files are due to be released in 2038 - so Trump brought the date forward then ? or are these different documents ?

JFK is a great piece of film making but liberties were taken with facts. Also consider that one of the people whose theories were taken on board was Jim Marrs, do a google and you'll see he's a bit soft in the head.
personally I wouldn't be surprised if there was a conspiracy but I'm not going to waste my time on reading any of it as there is so much nonsense out there, then there's the fact that the conspiracy theory industry is populated by people who revel in the fact that they are special because they know something that the sheeple don't.
I think if it was a conspiracy it was like something presented in James Ellroy's book, American Tabloid.

The Rape of Lucretia

Surprised even Trump is going to authorise this release - its going to blow the whole Roswell thing wide open, and he well then be forced to release the files on the those autopsies. What was done to the those poor stranded spacemen was horrific.

Ipso

If they release the Roswell files then the planet's reaction to secret weather balloons might lead to martial law, de-population etc

yew_tree

Ipso wrote: »

JFK is a great piece of film making but liberties were taken with facts. Also consider that one of the people whose theories were taken on board was Jim Marrs, do a google and you'll see he's a bit soft in the head.
personally I wouldn't be surprised if there was a conspiracy but I'm not going to waste my time on reading any of it as there is so much nonsense out there, then there's the fact that the conspiracy theory industry is populated by people who revel in the fact that they are special because they know something that the sheeple don't.
I think if it was a conspiracy it was like something presented in James Ellroy's book, American Tabloid.

It is very important though. If elements within the American government and/or intelligance agencies can take out a president in 1963..what have they done since?

Operation Northwoods was a plan by the CIA to launch false flag terrorists attacks against American citizens. This is not a theory and the documents are there for all to read.

The gulf of Tonkin incident was recently de-classified as a false flag operation and was part used as justification for invading Vietnam.

You just got to assume everything we hear is not 100% truth...be it from the internet or mainstream media.

Ipso

yew_tree wrote: »

It is very important though. If elements within the American government and/or intelligance agencies can take out a president in 1963..what have they done since?

Operation Northwoods was a plan by the CIA to launch false flag terrorists attacks against American citizens. This is not a theory and the documents are there for all to read.

The gulf of Tonkin incident was recently de-classified as a false flag operation and was part used as justification for invading Vietnam.

You just got to assume everything we hear is not 100% truth...be it from the internet or mainstream media.

That is if they have, there's way too much nonsense floating around about the assassination, and there are many different theories and who decides which is the correct one?

Who gets to decide what to trust? And to be blunt, I don't trust anyone in the conspiracy theory industry to decide what should be trusted or not. Quite frankly I think that segment of the population is the dregs of society.

RobbingBandit

When are the files due to be released?

branie2

On Thursday 26th

Itssoeasy

branie2 wrote: »

On Thursday 26th

Do we know what's being released and where ?

I find the whole JFK assassination in Dallas in November 1963 to be fascinating and no I don't buy any of the crazy conspiracy theories very much. I mean the news coverage of the day which thankfully has been kept and is on youtube is amazing to watch. The Zepruder film is both fascinating and horrible at the same time. A young president is killed in cold blood.

GM228

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Do we know what's being released and where ?

All remaining records* relating to it are to be released and will be available here.

*As per the "President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act, 1992" - All records, public and private, regardless of how labeled or identified, that document, describe, report on, analyze, or interpret activities, persons, or events as reasonably related to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy and investigations or inquiries into the assassination.

yew_tree

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Do we know what's being released and where ?

I find the whole JFK assassination in Dallas in November 1963 to be fascinating and no I don't buy any of the crazy conspiracy theories very much. I mean the news coverage of the day which thankfully has been kept and is on youtube is amazing to watch. The Zepruder film is both fascinating and horrible at the same time. A young president is killed in cold blood.

With all due respect they are only crazy if you don't understand them. There are daft theories but that does not mean all conspiracy theories are untrue.

For the record I have read the Warren Commission and I actually believe its possible Oswald made the shots, the angle and distance is not that difficult.

Now a kicker for me and always has been, the magic bullet which was found on Gov Connollys hospital stretcher...intact and barely damaged. Anyone who shoots or knows anything about shooting, will tell you it is impossible for a bullet to enter two bodies and shatter bone mass and come out intact.

See the pictures for yourself....it truly is a magic bullet.

The Nal

branie2 wrote: »

Back and to the left

Forward (from the rear shot) and then back and to the left, from nervous system spasms.

yew_tree wrote: »

Now a kicker for me and always has been, the magic bullet which was found on Gov Connollys hospital stretcher...intact and barely damaged. Anyone who shoots or knows anything about shooting, will tell you it is impossible for a bullet to enter two bodies and shatter bone mass and come out intact.

Nah its very possible. More likely than not actually in this case.

This is a good documentary but the "magic bullet" is discussed and tests are carried out from 22.30.

Note the shape of the hole in Connallys coat. A hole shape thats almost physically impossible unless the bullet has already passed through something.

mark_jmc

I've been to the museum in Dallas and I can't comprehend why Oswald didn't shoot him when the motorcade was travelling towards the book depository but instead waited until they were moving away down toward the underpass- from the vantage point of the window in the building it was a more difficult shot to take

The Nal

mark_jmc wrote: »

I've been to the museum in Dallas and I can't comprehend why Oswald didn't shoot him when the motorcade was travelling towards the book depository but instead waited until they were moving away down toward the underpass- from the vantage point of the window in the building it was a more difficult shot to take

Not really. The motorcade was on Houston St for a very short amount of time. If he shot and missed the driver could've sped up and then Oswalds 2nd shot would've been almost impossible as he would've been shooting at a target speeding up and turning just in front of him. Remember Connally was sitting in front of JFK which obscured Oswalds shot from the front.

Also, he would not have known exactly what car Kennedy was in, where he was sitting in the car and where the car was in the motorcade until he got closer to the building. There were 14 cars and dozens of motorbikes in the motorcade. The first time Oswald saw the motorcade is when it turned right onto Houston St (75 metres away) so he would've only had a couple of seconds to identify JFK to take the shot then.

As it happens, Oswalds did miss the closer shot when the car had just turned below him.

The distance isn't an issue really. 20 yards or so further away isn't an issue for a shooter like Oswald. And its an easier and more stable shot anyway. Less wobble through the scope.

Anyway, heres a picture of Oswald in the window just before the first shot.

dr.fuzzenstein

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Can't wait for the Oliver Stone Trump film.

I think it's more for Zucker, Abrahams and Zucker...

dr.fuzzenstein

My prediction: a lot of people will be very disappointed. Drab reality is never as entertaining or gripping as all those weird and wonderful conspiracy theories.
Of course that won't stop them, they'll simply shout "cover-up!" and carry on regardless.

valoren

One thing that always bothered me was Oswald being killed two days later.
There's just the element of silencing him that rankles with me. All that interest in him, during an era defining event, surrounded by law enforcement and some two-bit night club owner manages to not only get in his presence but is able to murder him at close range. Yeah right.

It is a weird dichotomy.

We put people into positions of power and we know full well that corruption, amoral behaviour and criminality is rife within those power structures Yet in situations like the Kennedy assassination anything or anybody questioning the official version of events which originated from within that very same power structure is smeared as lunacy or crazy 'conspiracy' theory.

There was very possibly a conspiracy that the President was to be eliminated and the version of events to be presented to a gullible public was that it was a lone gunman who killed him. Case closed. Now watch the 21 gun salute and move on. Then when it became known that not only was Oswald, having been stitched up as the culprit, very well capable of articulating how he was being used as a patsy, that he was shouting 'conspiracy' which might spook the public.

He was not going down quietly and that coupled with the idea that the actual assassination itself was captured on film, and not knowing the actual contents therein, in the panic they, whoever they are, needed to shut him up and that was arranged covertly with Ruby, a man with a murky past himself, and who was presumably blackmailed long before Dallas to do the deed if it became necessary. It's all nuts and extremely fascinating.

The Nal

valoren wrote: »

One thing that always bothered me was Oswald being killed two days later.
There's just the element of silencing him that rankles with me. All that interest in him, during an era defining event, surrounded by law enforcement and some two-bit night club owner manages to not only get in his presence but is able to murder him at close range. Yeah right.

Anyone with a fake press pass could've gotten to within a foot of Oswald in the jail. The cops brought him out for a press conference. Thats how it was in those days. John Peel was in the jail that night.

Silencing Oswalds two days later, after hes already spoken to the police and the FBI makes no sense. He could've told them everything already!

branie2

Marina Oswald, Lee's widow, thinks there was a conspiracy

[Deleted User]

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

My prediction: a lot of people will be very disappointed. Drab reality is never as entertaining or gripping as all those weird and wonderful conspiracy theories.
Of course that won't stop them, they'll simply shout "cover-up!" and carry on regardless.

Who is "them"?

Unlike the version of a conspiracy theorist that's in your head, where they think everything is a conspiracy, most are just interested in a couple of ones.

Many of them turn out to be true and the people who laughed at those who believed it either never even find out about it or stay quiet when it comes out.

Fittingly, the CIA turned "conspiracy theorist" into a slant after JFK.

cml387

- "The conspiracy to murder JFK went all the way to the top"
- "You mean the president knew???!!!"

Billy86

valoren wrote: »

One thing that always bothered me was Oswald being killed two days later.
There's just the element of silencing him that rankles with me. All that interest in him, during an era defining event, surrounded by law enforcement and some two-bit night club owner manages to not only get in his presence but is able to murder him at close range. Yeah right.

There's a decent point here, but let's not forget that RFK (seen by many to be the better politician and real brains of the family) got murdered in reasonably similar circumstances; security has really tightened up a hell of a lot since the 1960s - in no small part due to JFK, RFK and probably Oswald too.

Shurimgreat

The Nal wrote: »

Not really. The motorcade was on Houston St for a very short amount of time. If he shot and missed the driver could've sped up and then Oswalds 2nd shot would've been almost impossible as he would've been shooting at a target speeding up and turning just in front of him. Remember Connally was sitting in front of JFK which obscured Oswalds shot from the front.

Also, he would not have known exactly what car Kennedy was in, where he was sitting in the car and where the car was in the motorcade until he got closer to the building. There were 14 cars and dozens of motorbikes in the motorcade. The first time Oswald saw the motorcade is when it turned right onto Houston St (75 metres away) so he would've only had a couple of seconds to identify JFK to take the shot then.

As it happens, Oswalds did miss the closer shot when the car had just turned below him.

The distance isn't an issue really. 20 yards or so further away isn't an issue for a shooter like Oswald. And its an easier and more stable shot anyway. Less wobble through the scope.

Anyway, heres a picture of Oswald in the window just before the first shot.

I'm not disputing any of what you say, but that picture is very blurred and could be anyone.

branie2

We'd have more proof of a conspiracy, if the autopsy that was supposed to have taken place in Dallas hadn't been stopped.

The Nal

Billy86 wrote: »

There's a decent point here, but let's not forget that RFK (seen by many to be the better politician and real brains of the family) got murdered in reasonably similar circumstances; security has really tightened up a hell of a lot since the 1960s - in no small part due to JFK, RFK and probably Oswald too.

And even after that. Squeaky Fromme got within 2 feet of Gerald Ford with a loaded gun in 1975 and Sara Jane Moore missed him by 6 inches 2 weeks later. John Hinckley was allowed to stand within 15 feet of Reagan in 1981 and shot him from there.

Shurimgreat wrote: »

I'm not disputing any of what you say, but that picture is very blurred and could be anyone.

True. But he was the only person confirmed on that floor (by 2 co-workers) at the time and 5 witnesses described the shooter and having "light" or "white" clothing, his finger and palm prints were on the rifle and the boxes around the snipers nest.

Hector Savage

Didn't a report in the 1970s admit there was more to it than just Oswald that shot Kennedy ??

branie2

It did

The Nal

Hector Savage wrote: »

Didn't a report in the 1970s admit there was more to it than just Oswald that shot Kennedy ??

Yes. The United States House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA). They said there was a 4th shot from the grassy knoll which was solely based on acoustic evidence (a Dallas cop with his radio channel open) which was later proved false.

For it to be a runner, the cop would've had to be in a very specific place at a very specific time and later video evidence and mapping proved he was no where near the spot he needed to be.