'What are they hiding?': Group sues Biden and National Archives over JFK assassination records
- Thread starter Morrison71
- Start date
It’s going to be real embarrassing when it comes out that the secret service guy leading the car turned around and shot JFK on accident. He wasn’t even supposed to be there that day but the veteran guys all got way too drunk the night before and were in no shape to protect the president.
A
anon_b29nm7v7dwp6r
Guest
I mean at this point it’s pretty well accepted fact there was a conspiracy…and who did it doesn’t really matter as they’re nearly all dead.
It was Neil Armstrong. That’s why he had to escape to the moon.
A lot of people either forget or never knew that just three weeks earlier our CIA orchestrated the overthrow and murder of South Vietnam’s president. It’s not out of the realm of possibility that they also saw JFK as an unacceptable impediment to their plans in southeast Asia.
Likely it won’t be anything sexy.
probably trying to hide how deep the US was into other governments. They don’t want foreign countries to know how deep the U.S. can get into their shit.
probably trying to hide how deep the US was into other governments. They don’t want foreign countries to know how deep the U.S. can get into their shit.
Modern computer reinactments have proven beyond question that Oswald committed the crime. It’s beyond dispute.
I have no doubt that Oswald pulled the trigger. I’m just wondering who pulled the strings.
I don't think he did it on "behalf" of anyone. I do think his politics, his time in the USSR and his feeling towards Cuba are what caused him to do it.
Bingo. Ask yourself why for the most part Bobby and Jackie and the rest of the Kennedy's accepted the Warren Commission and didn't press the issue further.
The full investigation will reveal that JFK and RFK indeed did NOT stay hands off in Cuba as promised after Bay of Pigs, working with rogue elements such as the mafia and Cuban exile criminals. If there was a conspiracy, there is a significant chance that Kennedy's anti-Castro exploits directly blew back against him. It's almost impossible to disentangle the likely players in a JFK assassination plot from the players in the Kennedy's illegal anti-Castro Mafia-Cuban Exile-CIA asset plot.
You also can't credibly investigate a CIA-mafia plot against JFK without fully examining JFK's affair with Judith Exner.
If you are younger than say 35 or so, you have NO IDEA how powerful the Kennedy legend and Camelot worship was well into the 1980s and 1990s. It was an ingrained part of our national culture for as long as Boomers reigned supreme. If you're thinking that turning over a little embarrassing dirt on JFK certainly doesn't justify keeping such important information secret, you just have no idea. The passing of time, the aging of boomers, and the travails of ensuing Kennedy generations have only chipped the glory off the Kennedys in the last 20 years or so.
I'm no longer as convinced of a conspiracy as I once was. And I believe Oswald was the sole shooter, even if there was a greater conspiracy. However, I don't at all believe the beloved theories that LBJ, Hoover, the CIA director, the Army, etc did it.
People want to believe badly that it was a close inside job...but insiders like Hoover, CIA, FBI had a myriad of better ways to solve whatever they thought was a "Kennedy problem." They had enough dirt 100x over to blackmail him. They knew his medical problems that were concealed to the public. They knew his schedule intimately, every move he made. You're telling me that the same group that was plotting to kill Castro with a poisoned cigar, the best they could come up with was depending on a known crackpot to hit him in a moving car in front of thousands of people?
It's absurd. If the CIA proper wanted Kennedy dead, we'd all be talking about what a shame it was that he had a heart attack at such a young age, he just worked too hard for America. But realistically, they didn't need him dead. He was subject to all the same constraints of any other president or politician - political, personal, etc. It's become part of the Kennedy legend that he was some sort of Jesus figure that uniquely among all American presidents was so dangerous to the status quo, and so unencumbered by the normal constraints of a president, that he would have to be murdered. It's really just silly, especially because he was a hawkish moderate Democrat.
If this was a plot, it was an outsider plot, someone that couldn't get in the room with Kennedy.
The mob
Cuban exiles
CIA assets - unsavory operators with CIA connections, but not officially CIA
KKK (probably an under-investigated candidate)
Foreign operators (Castro's or Russia)
That's where you'll find it...someone for whom this plot would be the best you could come up with.
In regard to the possible involvement of organized crime in the assassination, something that sticks out to me are FBI wiretaps. I don’t remember which book detailed it, but at the time of JFK’s death and afterwards, the FBI had numerous wiretap operations going inside the crime families of Trafficante, Marcello and Giancana. Virtually no evidence of involvement was observed before or after Kennedy’s killing. I think that suggests pretty strongly that the mob wasn’t in on it, as they’ve proven time and time again that they can’t keep their mouths shut about anything.
I think Oswald had help. I also don't think Oswald was a lone shooter. I have no guess as to who was pulling the strings, or their motive.
First, Oswald wasn't very bright. I just don't see him planning this.
Second, Oswald wasn't a very good shot, evidenced by his Marine Corps ratings. He certainly wouldn't have gotten any better shooting at a target moving away from him, and from an elevated position, with a war surplus Italian rifle.
https://www.plaintruth.com/the_plain_truth/2013/11/jfk-how-good-of-a-shot-was-oswald.html
IMO, Oswald was used as a patsy.
There's no reason why all the documents shouldn't be released ASAP. It's 2022.
First, Oswald wasn't very bright. I just don't see him planning this.
Second, Oswald wasn't a very good shot, evidenced by his Marine Corps ratings. He certainly wouldn't have gotten any better shooting at a target moving away from him, and from an elevated position, with a war surplus Italian rifle.
https://www.plaintruth.com/the_plain_truth/2013/11/jfk-how-good-of-a-shot-was-oswald.html
IMO, Oswald was used as a patsy.
There's no reason why all the documents shouldn't be released ASAP. It's 2022.
Last edited:
The distance of the shot(s) is nothing. I have been to the site and it doesn’t look impressive to me. The target was moving away from Oswald but it wasn’t moving laterally just slowly moving away.
We all know who did it. Yep u guessed it. Frank Stallone.
So...I think that is a worthy point. It's a check in the "not the mafia" box for sure.
But, I have a few counterpoints to consider, as I'm a bit of a amateur mafiologist.
1. Absence of evidence is not evidence. Everyone agrees the mob killed Jimmy Hoffa, but they don't have that evidence on tape. They don't know who killed Sam Giancana. They didn't have tapes on the Luftshansa heist. The list goes on and on. Those might not be killing the president, but those, particularly Hoffa, are HUGE crimes that weren't captured on tape.
2. While there were wiretapping efforts in place, it is nothing like it is today or has been for the last several decades. It's really only since the late 1970s and 1980s that the mob has been extensively recorded. It has only really been post-RICO act. Federal wiretaps weren't allowed as trial evidence in federal courtrooms until 1968. The amount of recorded evidence pre-1980 is NOTHING like what we've seen since. The idea that wiretaps in place in the early 1960s were anything remotely comprehensive is a function of how we think of wiretapping now. Something may be escaping me, but I'm not aware of any mob case being significantly broken by wiretaps in the 1960s.
3. Related to the previous point, the majority of wiretaps in place at that time were blatantly illegal and off the books. The idea that any agency or individual would have access to all tapes to make such a proclamation of "never caught on tape" is just not feasible. If something had been caught on tape, there is little reason to be confident that it would have been surfaced, since it would have been evidence of law enforcement malfeasance. Remember, in this general era the FBI was EXTENSIVELY and illegally wiretapping the likes of MLK, the Kennedys themselves, John Lennon, Marilyn Monroe, etc. the likelihood that the FBI would release something they obtained illegally is pretty small.
4. Related to the previous point, Hoover until just five years earlier had denied the existence of the mafia. He was only reluctantly and embarrassingly forced to change course by the Appalachin bust. There has been considerably well-founded speculation that Hoover was compromised by the Mob. While the FBI now has a long and well deserved reputation for mob-busting, they were extremely new to it at the time, and largely dragged into it kicking and screaming by RFK. Evidence that the mob, whose existence Hoover had until recently denied in the face of all evidence, had killed the president, would be damaging to the point of career-ending. Add that professional embarrassment to potential mafia leverage on Hoover and potential to expose illegal wiretapping, and its very uncertain, if not unlikely, that wiretapped evidence would have surfaced after the fact.
5. RFK's war on the mafia was one of overt harassment. They openly followed Giancana on the golf course. They kidnapped Marcello and dropped him in Guatemala. They harassed family members. The mob knew they were under siege at all levels. The biggest cause of being caught on tape by mobsters is complacency, thinking they couldn't possibly be being spied upon. The mob in RFK's crosshairs were intimately aware of being under scrutiny, making it far less likely that they be caught on tape.
6. It's very likely that a mafia plot would be WAY less extensive than it is now talked about being. It would almost certainly have been activated by Marcello in New Orleans, with possibly some consultation with Trafficante in Florida. Marcello's family, as the first mob family in the US, was widely independent of the commission, and far more likely to act outside the commission. It's highly unlikely the commission would have sanctioned it. If it was a Marcello solo act, few to no other mafioso would have known about it, rendering lack of discussion of it irrelevant. Many have linked the assassination to Chicago, and I think even that is unlikely. In the years since, many mobsters and authors have claimed a much wider mob conspiracy to kill JFK, but having read almost all of it, I believe that is largely the result of self-aggrandizing, equally on both the mobsters and authors. Nothing sells like a link to the JFK assassination. They've all "got a book."
Ultimately, the lack of tapes falls into the same category that can be used to dismiss all the conspiracy plots - there's no actual evidence for it. That doesn't make it a weak argument, that's a strong argument against it.
But to me, it's very silly to claim that the evidence of mafia involvement is weak, while evidence of other domestic conspiracies is strong. The evidence against the mafia is at least as strong if not stronger as it is against LBJ, the formal CIA, Hoover, etc. All the same connections to individual players are there, if not stronger - almost all the favorite players in the "CIA plot" scenario (like David Ferrie or Clay Shaw or Jack Ruby) are way more well documented in their connection to the mob than they are to the CIA. There are just as many "witnesses" coming out long after the fact of things being said or done or planned. Just as much circumstantial evidence.
The difference to me, is that for all the other conspiracies, the accuser ALSO has to press a totally unsupported MOTIVE. That Kennedy was secretly going to pull out of Vietnam. That Kennedy was going to take us on the gold standard, or keep us on the gold standard. That Kennedy was going to reform the Federal Reserve. That Kennedy was going to fire Hoover. Even the motives have to be weaved together out of thin unsupported speculation.
In the case of Marcello/Mafia, there is no such speculation needed. The motive is right on the surface, documented, obvious for the world. Not remotely in dispute. In the case of the "mafia did it" angle, half the work is already done.
And yes, I know aint nobody got time to read all that. But this is one of my "pet things."
The Mob would never do it. These guys don't want that kind of attention. Killing a judge, LEO , etc yes. But they aren't going this high up. Regardless of motivation.
Dulles was put on the Commission by President Johnson and okayed by Hoover. Even Bobby Kennedy approved this, which might seem strange since the President had fired Dullesfrom his CIA Director’s post after the Bay of Pig’s invasion fiasco. But RFK also wanted to make sure that his brother’s plans to use the CIA to try to kill Castro stayed secret.
Dulles was the most active member of the Commission. At the very beginning, Dulles passed a leaflet that loners had assassinated all the other Presidents, and Oswald was no exception.
Johnson wanted seven men he could trust to deliver a pre drawn conclusion that Oswald was the lone assassin without any confederates. LBJ knew Dulles wouldn’t fail him in this regard.
Dulles was the most active member of the Commission. At the very beginning, Dulles passed a leaflet that loners had assassinated all the other Presidents, and Oswald was no exception.
Johnson wanted seven men he could trust to deliver a pre drawn conclusion that Oswald was the lone assassin without any confederates. LBJ knew Dulles wouldn’t fail him in this regard.
Dulles killed the secret serviceman who killed JFK. Tippit’s killer is still out there running around free in his 90’s. Tippit is the real victim in everything.
That's why I said this would be a Marcello act, maybe in cahoots with Trafficante. This would never get through the Mafia Commission. I think most of the mafia theories involving even Chicago are probably fanciful, let alone on to NY. I agree in principle.
But Marcello was a bit of a different animal, the New Orleans family played by a lot of its own rules, and it was more personal with Marcello than anyone else.
If the mafia was behind it, it would probably be more accurate to say it was a Marcello conspiracy than a mafia conspiracy.
A junk yard dog way off the chain. My guess is if they had pulled a stunt like that. They would be eaten quickly by other mob families.
There was a mountain of damaging stuff to make every stakeholder, including the Kennedys, want an open and shut lone nut case, without any implication in being responsible for the assassination.
To say nothing of the idea that nobody ever talks about when discussing the Warren Commission...the biggest stakes in this thing, given Oswald's Russia and Cuba connections, was to prevent WW3.
When people list off the reasons the Warren Commission was sketchy and seemed rushed to a foregone conclusion, they rarely mention that literally the future of human existence was in the balance.
