RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Gibson writes: "Government documents declassified after the passage of the JFK Records Act in 1992 prove that the official narrative is bullshit. There is overwhelming evidence implicating the CIA and other United States intelligence agencies, as well as top military officials and corporate entities, in a complex plot to stage a coup against a president who rebelled against their wishes."

President John F. Kennedy is seen riding in motorcade approximately one minute before he was shot in Dallas, Tx., on Nov. 22, 1963. In the car riding with Kennedy are Mrs. Jacqueline Kennedy, right, Nellie Connally, left, and her husband, Gov. John Connally of Texas. (photo: AP)
President John F. Kennedy is seen riding in motorcade approximately one minute before he was shot in Dallas, Tx., on Nov. 22, 1963. In the car riding with Kennedy are Mrs. Jacqueline Kennedy, right, Nellie Connally, left, and her husband, Gov. John Connally of Texas. (photo: AP)


16 Mind-Blowing Facts About Who Really Killed JFK

By Carl Gibson, Reader Supported News

22 November 13

 

overnment documents declassified after the passage of the JFK Records Act in 1992 prove that the official narrative is bullshit. There is overwhelming evidence implicating the CIA and other United States intelligence agencies, as well as top military officials and corporate entities, in a complex plot to stage a coup against a president who rebelled against their wishes.

Many of the facts revealed in this article were gleaned from the book "JFK and the Unspeakable," by Jim Douglass, which has recently been endorsed by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. I use Douglass's book as a main source, as all of his facts are documented in over 100 pages of endnotes, citing declassified government documents contained in the National Archives building in Maryland, which are available to the public.

1. Eisenhower warned us of the "military-industrial complex" just before Kennedy took office

In January of 1961, the five-star general who commanded the defeat of the Nazis in World War II, who served as commander-in-chief during the Korean War, and who became the first Supreme Commander of NATO, spoke ominously in his final address to the nation of a sinister group of entities he called the "military-industrial complex." President Eisenhower urged Americans to stay alert and aware before this shadowy, intimately-tied group of government and corporate entities seized too much power.

"Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.... In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex.... We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted." – Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961

Eisenhower's successor would go toe-to-toe with the beast Eisenhower warned us about in his farewell address on a near-daily basis. The military-industrial complex had already laid out plans for the World War II veteran and newly-elected president to pre-emptively start a nuclear war with the Soviet Union. John F. Kennedy's insistence on peace would be his downfall.

2. JFK went toe to toe with military contractor United States Steel

"My father always told me that all businessmen were sons of bitches, but I never believed it until now."John F. Kennedy, April 1962

One of the leading companies in the military-industrial complex Eisenhower warned of was United States Steel, a major contractor with the US military that controlled 25% of the entire steel market. Steelworkers staged a 4-month strike in 1959 during Eisenhower's second term, and Kennedy hoped to avoid a similar flareup during his tenure amidst fears of inflation affecting steel prices.

JFK brokered a deal between United Steel Workers (USW) and the steel industry, by which workers would get a slight wage increase while a price hike on steel would be avoided for the time being. Kennedy praised the industry for the compromise, calling it "industrial statesmanship of the highest order." But the words quoted above were spoken to his aides in private, after United States Steel CEO Roger Blough double-crossed Kennedy and informed him in the Oval Office, after the deal was done, that his company would actually be raising steel prices by 3.5 percent to $6 a ton, with other steel companies following suit.

But after Kennedy's defense secretary, Robert McNamara, informed United States Steel that a new submarine construction contract would be given to a smaller steel company that hadn't agreed to the price hike, other industries that had raised prices in response to U.S. Steel's maneuver quickly withdrew their price hikes, leaving the military-industrial complex smarting from the Kennedy administration's pointed blow.

3. The military-industrial complex regularly pressured JFK to start all-out nuclear war

"And we call ourselves the human race." – John F. Kennedy to Secretary of State Dean Rusk, after walking out of a top-secret Pentagon briefing

The specter of nuclear war constantly loomed over the Kennedy administration. While JFK famously de-escalated the threat of nuclear war during the Cuban Missile Crisis, what was not yet known was that Fidel Castro had allowed Russian missiles on Cuban land only as a deterrent against a US attack. However, Kennedy's Joint Chiefs of Staff thought the opposite, that if the United States didn't strike first, the nation would be obliterated. Plans for a nuclear first strike against the Soviet Union were already in place by the time Kennedy took office.

"Even though it sounds crazy to us, the CIA truly believed Kennedy was deliberately obstructing a war that had to happen," Jim Douglass told me in a phone interview. "The Soviets were seen as absolute evil, and we were the supposed 'good guys.'"

On page 237, Jim Douglass describes a top-secret "Doomsday Briefing" between Kennedy and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, where plans were laid out for a pre-emptive nuclear strike on the Soviet Union in 1963. Kennedy repeatedly pressed his top generals for an assessment of the effectiveness of such an attack, and the potential loss of life in the United States. Finally, Kennedy walked out in disgust, making the remark quoted above to his secretary of state.

At the height of cold war tensions, top military brass were deeply troubled by the prospect of a commander-in-chief who actively sought peace with an entity widely viewed as the ultimate enemy of the United States.

4. JFK secretly brokered a nuclear disarmament treaty with Khrushchev

President Kennedy and Soviet Chairman Nikita Khrushchev secretly wrote letters to one another throughout JFK's presidency, and both eventually began to doubt their circle of advisers and appointees about the evil of the other and gradually worked toward peace. Twenty-one letters of correspondence were released by the State Department in July of 1993 after a Freedom of Information Act request was filed by a Canadian newspaper.

Kennedy had first met with Khrushchev in Vienna, and was stunned at his hard-headedness and nonchalance about the prospect of nuclear war. But Khrushchev's first letter to Kennedy, which a KGB agent covertly handed to Kennedy's press secretary, Pierre Salinger, behind the back of the Kremlin, spoke warmly of his retreat near the Black Sea and lamented conditions that could lead to the annihilation of millions. Referring to their earlier meeting in Vienna, Khrushchev said:

"The whole world hopefully expected that our meeting and a frank exchange of views would have a soothing effect, would turn relations between our countries into the correct channel and promote adoption of decisions which would give the peoples confidence that at least peace on earth will at last be secured. To my regret – and I believe, to yours – this did not happen." – Nikita Khrushchev, September 29, 1961

From October 16 to 28, 1962, Kennedy willfully ignored his military and intelligence advisers and decided to resolve the Cuban Missile Crisis without instigating nuclear war. The reason Khrushchev installed the missiles in the first place was due to his understanding that the Bay of Pigs invasion was merely the United States' first of many forays into Cuban affairs, as he wrote in his memoir.

Robert F. Kennedy, in his memoir "Thirteen Days," wrote of the tense situation his brother faced as the situation seemed to deteriorate toward nuclear war and human annihilation. At one point, two Soviet submarines were charging toward the US naval blockade, which was set up in Cuban waters to stop further shipments of warheads from the USSR. The submarines were targeted for destruction by depth charges, which would likely set off a chain of events leading to war. RFK wrote about his grey-faced brother clenching his fist and holding it over his mouth before Khrushchev ordered the subs to not challenge the blockade at the last minute.

According to White House tapes declassified in the late nineties, General Curtis LeMay of the Joint Chiefs of Staff admonished his commander-in-chief during the crisis for setting up the blockade instead of launching a pre-emptive strike. LeMay compared the blockade to the notorious appeasement of Hitler at Munich in 1938, saying Kennedy's decision would make him look weak to the Soviets and to the American public.

LeMay: "You're in a pretty bad fix." Kennedy (laughing): "You're in with me, personally."

However, the crisis was resolved peacefully, largely thanks to the rapport JFK and Khrushchev established with the secret letters they sent each other through intermediaries. In October of 1963, Khrushchev signed a historic nuclear test ban treaty, which, in a letter to the president, he said would "clear the road to general and complete disarmament, and, consequently, to the delivering of peoples from the threat of war."

Khrushchev also wrote about the potential for projects the two leaders could work on, like the "conclusion of a non-aggression pact between countries of NATO and member states of the Warsaw Pact, creation of nuclear-free zones in various regions of the world, barring the further spread of the nuclear weapon, banning of launching into orbit objects bearing nuclear weapons, measures for the prevention of a surprise attack, among other steps."

However, when Soviet foreign minister Valerian Zorin handed this letter to US ambassador Foy Kohler, a cold warrior recommended by the Foreign Service whom Kennedy appointed only when his brother could offer no alternatives, Kohler commented to the State Department that the letter contained nothing of value. The State Department wrote a boilerplate two-paragraph response that remained forever in limbo, and Kennedy died a month later, never seeing the correspondence from the Soviet leader that could have ended the cold war.

5. JFK openly sided with Castro in the Cuban Revolution

"If you see him again, tell him that I'm willing to declare Goldwater my friend if that will guarantee Kennedy's re-election!"Fidel Castro to Jean Daniel, November 19, 1963

On October 24, 1963, French journalist Jean Daniel met with JFK in an interview arranged by Newsweek. Daniel would later interview Fidel Castro, just three days before Kennedy's assassination. US-Cuba relations had been volatile since the botched Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961. Castro had recently removed Fulgencio Batista, a right-wing dictator allied with the US, from office, and instead allied with the Soviet Union in the height of the cold war. The Bay of Pigs invasion was the CIA's failed ploy to push Kennedy into a corner and force him to go to war with Cuba, and by default, the Soviet Union.

President Eisenhower had already allocated $13 million to the CIA during his final year in office to authorize the training of Brigade 2506, a paramilitary group charged with overthrowing the Castro regime. Three days after Bridgade 2506 traveled from Guatemala to invade Cuba, Castro forced their surrender, prompting Kennedy to make the decision to mount a larger invasion or suffer a humiliating defeat. After the incident, Kennedy famously said he wanted to "splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds."

Jean Daniel's eye-opening interview with President Kennedy, roughly 2 years after the Bay of Pigs and a year after the Cuban Missile Crisis, revealed that Kennedy in fact sympathized with Fidel Castro, the socialist leader that Americans were conditioned to hate. This is in spite of the fact that Kennedy ran against Nixon in the election on a platform of stiffness toward the Cuban regime.

"I believe that there is no country in the world including any and all the countries under colonial domination, where economic colonization, humiliation and exploitation were worse than in Cuba, in part owing to my country's policies during the Batista regime.... I will even go further: to some extent it is as though Batista was the incarnation of a number of sins on the part of the United States. Now we shall have to pay for those sins. In the matter of the Batista regime, I am in agreement with the first Cuban revolutionaries."John F. Kennedy, October 24, 1963

Just as he did with Nikita Khrushchev, JFK used intermediaries to correspond with Castro and set up a meeting between the two leaders, subverting his own State Department. Kennedy instructed Adlai Stevenson's assistant, William Atwood, to start communicating with Cuba's UN ambassador, Carlos Lechuga. Castro was doing the same, having been urged by Khrushchev to communicate with Kennedy in an attempt to make peace. Atwood was making progress on setting up talks between the two leaders through Castro's assistant, Rene Vallejo.

On November 19, 1963, Fidel Castro appeared suddenly at Jean Daniel's hotel in Havana, prompting a six-hour conversation from 10 p.m. to 4 a.m., wanting to hear all about his conversation with Kennedy. The Cuban leader told Daniel that he believed Kennedy could be the one US president to forge world peace.

"He still has the possibility of becoming, in the eyes of history, the greatest President of the United States, the leader who may at last understand that there can be coexistence between capitalists and socialists, even in the Americas. He would then be an even greater president than Lincoln," Castro said.

On the afternoon of November 22, Jean Daniel was interviewing Castro at his home about the Cuban Missile Crisis, when Castro got a call about President Kennedy having been shot in Dallas. Upon hearing the news, Castro repeated the phrase, "Es una mala noticia (this is bad news)," three times. Upon hearing confirmation of Kennedy's death, Castro told Daniel, "Everything is changed. Everything is going to change." Lyndon Baynes Johnson put on hold any and all dialogue between Washington and Havana, despite Castro's numerous attempts to reach out and make peace.

6. JFK was secretly working to end the US occupation of Vietnam

"This war in Vietnam – it's never off my mind, it haunts me day and night… The first thing I do when I'm re-elected, I'm going to get the Americans out of Vietnam."John F. Kennedy to next-door neighbor Larry Newman in Hyannis Port, October 20, 1963

Before delving into Vietnam, it's important to acknowledge that Kennedy has received lots of deserved criticism over his decision to deploy Agent Orange, a toxic chemical weapon developed by Monsanto, Dow Chemical and others, in Vietnam in 1962. Agent Orange was responsible for the contamination of crops and thousands of Vietnamese deaths, and will continue to cause serious health defects for generations of Vietnamese yet to be born. Agent Orange also contributed to the deaths of US soldiers who developed serious health conditions upon their return home.

But to fully understand the transition Kennedy underwent from fierce cold warrior to staunch advocate for world peace, Jim Douglass's "JFK and the Unspeakable" is a must-read. Douglass cites letters written by Thomas Merton, a monk living in Kentucky who offered harsh critiques of Kennedy's foreign policy and in-depth analysis of his complete transition from a war hawk to a peacemaker. Along with juggling the world-shaking Cuban Missile Crisis and constant tensions with the Soviet Union, Kennedy also had to deal with the prospect of either continuing to prop up the brutal and corrupt Diem regime, or allowing a coup that would oust Diem and give the Soviets an extra piece in the global chess game between the US and USSR.

In late April of 1961, General Douglas MacArthur, who commanded the Allies in the Pacific, told Kennedy: "Anyone wanting to commit American ground forces to the mainland of Asia should have his head examined." When the Joint Chiefs of Staff pressured Kennedy to up the troop presence in Vietnam and even deploy nuclear weapons, he cited the words of General MacArthur in defending his position.

In November of 1963, Kennedy told General David Shoup, commander of the Marines and the only member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff he trusted, that the first thing he'd do following the election would be to pull all troops out of Vietnam. Shoup advised his commander-in-chief, "Unless we were prepared to use a million men in a major drive, we should pull out before the war expanded beyond control." Kennedy issued National Security Action Memo (NSAM) 263 just before his death, which secretly authorized the withdrawal of 1,000 US troops from Vietnam. As history shows, NSAM 263 would never be obeyed, and the Vietnam War would escalate into an unwinnable quagmire under the LBJ administration.

7. JFK refused a 9/11-esque plot to stage terrorist attacks on US soil to be blamed on Cuba

"We could blow up a drone (unmanned) vessel anywhere in the Cuban waters.... The US could follow up with an air/sea rescue operation covered by US fighters to 'evacuate' remaining members of the non-existent crew. Casualty lists in US newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation." – Operation Northwoods, March 13, 1962

In the Spring of 1962, the Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on a sinister, top-secret plot to create the political will to invade Cuba, called Operation Northwoods. This plan was so secretive that it couldn't be seen by even "commanders of unified or specified commands," "US officers assigned to NATO activities," or even "the Chairman, US delegation, United Nations Military Staff Committee." Upon seeing the documents, Kennedy told Joints Chiefs of Staff Chairman Lyman Lemnitzer there was no way Operation Northwoods would happen under his watch, and a few months later, subsequently denied a renewal of his chairmanship. These excerpts of the document are probably what made Kennedy say no, more than anything else:

"A series of well-coordinated incidents will be planned to take place in and around Guantanamo to give genuine appearance of being done by hostile Cuban forces."

"We could sink a boatload of Cubans enroute to Florida (real or simulated)."

"7. Hijacking attempts of civil air and surface craft should appear to continue as harassing measures condoned by the government of Cuba."

Operation Northwoods goes on to explain a detailed plan involving a CIA plane to be painted at Eglin Air Force Base to duplicate a registered civilian aircraft that would be converted to a drone. Then, "any grouping of people with a common interest" would charter a nonscheduled flight to a South American country with a flight plan that crosses Cuba.

The passengers would all be given "carefully prepared aliases" before boarding, and once their plane passed a "rendezvous point" south of Florida, the drone aircraft would proceed to be detonated by radio control over Cuban airspace after "transmitting on the international frequency a 'MAY DAY' message stating he is under attack by Cuban MIG aircraft." Meanwhile, the jet with the passengers would fly at minimum altitude back to Eglin so the military would "return the aircraft to its original status."

Every last detail was thought out for this false flag attack, including the addition of a "pre-briefed pilot" who would fly "tail-end-Charlie," or right in between the passenger plane and the drone craft. Upon crossing into Cuban airspace, the pilot would put out a distress signal that he was under attack by Cuban MIG aircraft, say he's going down, and fly back to Eglin, whereupon a new tail number would be given to his craft. The pilot would then "resume his proper identity and return to his normal place of business." Meanwhile, other surface craft would litter the waters surrounding Cuba with F-101 parts, where search ships would be sent out to find a parachute and other aircraft parts. The document states, "The pilots returning to Homestead would have a true story as far as they knew."

Despite Kennedy's steadfast refusal of their nefarious plan, the Joint Chiefs of Staff agreed to keep planning "pretext operations" without Lemnitzer, who would become the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO after Kennedy's assassination.

8. Lee Harvey Oswald was a CIA asset

Three years before the Kennedy assassination, Lee Harvey Oswald was being investigated by the CIA's Special Investigations Group (SIG), a branch of the agency's Counter-Intelligence (CI) division, headed by James Angleton between 1954 and 1974. This was confirmed in the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) questioning of Ann Egerter, a member of Angleton's staff who opened the CIA file on Lee Harvey Oswald (a "201 file" in US intel lingo) in December of 1960.

The kicker is that the CI/SIG division is only tasked with investigating current CIA agents who are potential security risks. Egerter said her office was known within the CIA as "the office that spied on spies." She further elaborated on SIG as the entity that undertook "investigations of agency employees where there was an indication of espionage."

Because CIA agents are forbidden to disclose the identity of any other agents, Oswald's true occupation could only be discerned through indirect questions directed at Egerter. One HSCA interviewer asked her what the purpose of the CI/SIG was within the agency. Through this line of questioning, it can be discerned that Lee Harvey Oswald was seen in 1960 as a security risk, making him easy to burn, for example, as a patsy in the Kennedy assassination.

Interviewer: "Please correct me if I'm wrong … it seems that the purpose of CI/SIG was very limited and that limited purpose was to investigate agency employees who for some reason were under suspicion."

Egerter: "That is correct."

Interviewer: "When a 201 file is opened, does that mean that whoever opens the file has either an intelligence interest in the individual, or, if not an intelligence interest, he thinks that the individual may present a counterintelligence risk?"

Egerter: "Well, in general, I would say that would be correct."

Interviewer: "Would there be any other reason for opening up a file?"

Egerter: "No, I can't think of one."

9. Oswald was on the FBI's payroll

In 1963, William Walter was a clerk in the FBI's New Orleans office. He told the HSCA that Lee Oswald indeed had "an informant's status with our office." Orest Pena, another FBI informant, said he saw Oswald with FBI agent Warren deBrueys on 'numerous occasions,' even stating that deBrueys physically threatened him about not revealing what he saw before Pena appeared before the Warren Commission. Oswald's friend Adrian Alba, who managed a New Orleans garage that held FBI and Secret Service cars, recalled watching Oswald approach an FBI car outside the garage and receive a white envelope that was handed to him through a cracked window before concealing it under his shirt. Alba later said Oswald "met the car again a couple of days later and talked briefly with the driver," whom Alba knew as an "FBI agent visiting New Orleans from Washington."

While in New Orleans, Oswald was working for the Reily Coffee Company, which was owned by William B. Reily, a financial supporter of the CIA-sponsored Cuban Revolutionary Council. A CIA memo dated January 31, 1964, that has since been declassified states "[Reily's] firm was of interest as of April 1949." CIA contractor Gerry Patrick Hemming also confirmed Reily's coordination with the CIA in a 1968 interview with the New Orleans District Attorney's Office, which "confirmed that William Reily had worked for the CIA for years." Reily's company was located close to the New Orleans offices of the CIA, FBI, Secret Service, and Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI).

Oswald also worked in the office of a detective and former FBI agent named Guy Banister, whose office was directly across the street from the ONI and Secret Service offices. According to Daniel Campbell, an ex-Marine who spied on radical New Orleans students and gave small arms training to Cuban exiles, "Banister was a bagman for the CIA and was running guns to Alpha 66 in Miami." As you'll read later, Alpha 66 was a CIA-funded group of Cuban vigilantes plotting to overthrow Castro.

Oswald's intelligence connections may explain why he was able to summon an FBI agent so easily following his August arrest for an altercation that broke out when he was passing out pro-Castro leaflets. Oswald had written to the New York headquarters of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee about starting a New Orleans branch, and FPCC national director V.T. Lee wrote back, urging him not to cause "unnecessary incidents which frighten away prospective supporters." Oswald did the exact opposite.

On August 5, Oswald visited Carlos Bringuier at his clothing store about wanting to train Cubans to fight Castro. Bringuier was leader of the Directorio Revolucionario Estudiantil (DRE), which was later described in a 1967 CIA memorandum as "conceived, created and funded by the CIA." When E. Howard Hunt testified to the HSCA, he named David Atlee Phillips as the person in charge of the group. Though Bringuier testified to the Warren Commission that he was wary about Oswald's visit, the two CIA-connected men nevertheless staged an act of elaborate street theater that ended in a fight and subsequent arrest of the two men and three of Bringuier's friends.

While he was in jail, Oswald asked to speak to the FBI, whereupon Special Agent John Quigley met with him for an hour and a half. When Quigley testified about this incident to the Warren Commission, he said Oswald simply explained to him why he was passing out the Castro leaflets. But Harold Weisberg's book "Whitewash IV" included top-secret remarks from chief Warren Commission council J. Lee Rankin, which were declassified after an extensive legal battle. Rankin's statement revealed the actual reason for Oswald's meeting with Quigley. According to the session transcript, Rankin stated Oswald was "employed by the FBI at $200 a month from September of 1962 up to the time of the assassination."

10. CIA assets helped Lee Harvey Oswald get work

Oswald's connections to the CIA and FBI would explain why Oswald was issued a passport from New Orleans, Louisiana, to Minsk, USSR, in 1959 in just 24 hours. This is highly unusual, considering Oswald, a former member of the military, had just renounced his American citizenship in the height of the Cold War to travel to the Soviet Union, where presumably his knowledge of military radar from his service in the Marines (including his work on the CIA's top-secret U-2 project, which you'll read about later) would be given to the enemy. Upon Oswald's return to the US in 1961, he and his new wife, Marina, were befriended by the vehemently anti-Communist Russian community in Fort Worth.

While he was in Fort Worth, Oswald became acquainted with a man named George de Mohrenschildt, a CIA asset and son of a Czarist Russia official who liked to be called "The Baron." In a 1977 interview, de Mohrenschildt admitted that he was given approval to first contact Oswald in late 1961 by J. Walton Moore, the CIA's Domestic Contacts Service Chief in Dallas. Moore primed de Mohrenschildt to meet his contact, informing him of "an ex-American Marine who had worked in an electronics factory in Minsk, and in whom there was 'interest.'" In the summer of 1962, de Mohenschildt said he was handed Oswald's address by an associate of Moore, and, as a quid pro quo, asked Moore to facilitate a contract through his company with "Papa Doc" Duvalier in Haiti.

According to de Mohrenschildt's wife and daughter, In October of 1962, just 9 days before the Cuban Missile Crisis, Oswald's new friend and mentor George de Mohrenschildt convinced Lee and Marina to move to Dallas. "The Baron" set up a job for Oswald at a graphic arts company called Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall (JCS), which had contracts with the US Army Map Service. Even though Oswald had renounced his citizenship and would normally be seen as a turncoat by military security apparatus, he nonetheless was working on classified projects involving top-secret U-2 missions. Oswald's coworkers at JCS said they were working on setting type for Cuban place names to be put on maps, and just days later, Kennedy would be shown photos taken by the CIA's U-2 spy planes, confirming the presence of Soviet nuclear warheads in Cuba.

"The Baron" also facilitated the first meeting between the Oswalds and Ruth Paine, a housewife with powerful connections to the military-industrial complex. George de Mohrenschildt introduced Paine to Marina Oswald at a party he arranged in February of 1963. Two weeks later, Marina Oswald would move in with Ruth Paine at her home in Irving, a suburb of Dallas, while Lee Oswald went to look for work in New Orleans. Ruth's husband, Michael, worked as a research engineer for Bell Helicopter, a defense contractor in Fort Worth. Thirty years after the Kennedy assassination, it was discovered that Michael Paine's stepfather, Arthur Young, was actually the inventor of the Bell Helicopter, connecting him deeply with the military-industrial complex Eisenhower warned us about.

Michael Paine's mother was Ruth Forbes Paine Young, who came from the aristocratic Forbes family of Boston and was friends with Mary Bancroft, a World War II-era spy who became CIA director Allen Dulles's mistress in Switzerland. When Michael Paine was testifying to the Warren Commission, Allen Dulles asked him, "Is this Mr. Young your stepfather?" When Paine confirmed that fact, Dulles remained quiet, allowing other Commissioners to ask their questions. Dulles knew that any follow-up questions he asked of Paine might lead to public knowledge of his intimate family connections with a main benefactor of the president's accused assassin.

The Paine family's CIA connections run even deeper. After the passage of the JFK Records Act in 1992, declassified documents showed Paine's older sister, Sylvia Hyde Hoke, was listed as a CIA employee in the 1961 issue of the city directory for Falls Church, Virginia. In her testimony to the Warren Commission, Ruth Paine very modestly described her father, William Avery Hyde, as an insurance underwriter who "writes the fine print." But after the publication of the Warren Report in October of 1964, William Avery Hyde received a 3-year contract from the State Department's US Agency for International Development (USAID) as the regional insurance adviser for all of Latin America, filing reports from Peru, Bolivia, Ecuador and Panama. Ohio governor John Gilligan (father of current Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius) was administrator of USAID from 1977 to 1979, and described its role as a proxy agency for the CIA.

"At one time, many AID field offices were infiltrated from top to bottom with CIA people. It was pretty well known in the agency who they were and what they were up to … The idea was to plant operatives in every kind of activity we had overseas, government, volunteer, religious, every kind." John Gilligan

The Warren Commission shows that Ruth Paine called the Texas School Book Depository on October 14, 1963 about possible job openings for Lee Oswald, after a neighbor suggested the idea. Oswald was interviewed for a part-time job there on the 15th, and started work on the 16th, where he would be paid $208.82 a month. However, the commission also reveals that Paine lied under oath about being contacted by the Texas Employment Commission on October 15th about a far more lucrative full-time job for Oswald at Trans-Texas Airways as a cargo handler, where he would be paid $310 a month. In just a few exchanges with Warren Commission lawyer Albert Jenner, Paine went from denying any knowledge of the job offer, to vaguely remembering it, to hearing about the job from Lee Oswald himself.

Just as the Paine family became the prime sponsors of the Oswalds, the deal de Mohrenschildt asked J. Walton Moore to broker with the Haitian government came through. "The Baron" left Dallas for Haiti in April of 1963, while briefly stopping in Washington to meet with CIA and US Army intelligence to enhance his Haitian connections. De Mohrenschildt was awarded a $285,000 contract to conduct geological surveys for the notoriously corrupt and brutal Duvalier regime. No survey was done, but de Mohrenschildt still deposited $200,000 in his Port-au-Prince bank account that year. In his final interview in 1977, "The Baron" said, "I never would have contacted Oswald in a million years if Moore had not sanctioned it." Oddly enough, just three hours after that interview, George de Mohrenschildt was dead of an apparent self-inflicted shotgun blast.

FBI director J. Edgar Hoover noticed how suspicious this all looked and warned the Warren Commission against publicizing the connection. On October 23, 1964, Warren Commission chief counsel J. Lee Rankin received a sternly-worded letter from Hoover, warning him not to release the FBI's "reports and memoranda dealing with Michael and Ruth Paine and George and Jeanne de Mohrenschildt ... Making the contents available to the public could cause serious repercussions to the commission."

11. Oswald was seen in Dallas with a CIA covert ops chief two months before the assassination

Antonio Veciana, leader of the CIA-funded paramilitary group Alpha 66 recalled seeing a thin, pale man with wavy hair in a downtown Dallas office building conversing with the CIA contact he knew as "Maurice Bishop." Bishop was actually David Atlee Phillips, then the chief of covert operations for the CIA's Mexico City branch (and head of the DRE in New Orleans, as mentioned earlier). Veciana finally opened up about this Oswald sighting in 1975 to Gaeton Fonzi, an investigator with the HSCA.

According to Veciana, he saw "Bishop" talking to a young man with a pale complexion in early September of 1963, whom he would later recognize, after November 22, as Lee Harvey Oswald. When Veciana walked into the lobby to meet with Bishop, he noticed the two quickly exchanged a few more words before Oswald left, and Bishop initiated a conversation with Veciana about Alpha 66, not once mentioning the man with whom he had just been speaking. And Veciana didn't ask.

Before Veciana was set to testify to the HSCA about the Oswald sighting, the FBI warned him three separate times that he would be killed. Veciana was shot in the head by an unknown would-be assassin and recovered, but the FBI refused to investigate, instead deferring to an uncooperative Miami police department.

12. The CIA revealed their hand in killing JFK through the use of Oswald doubles

Bear with me, because it's about to get really confusing. The pieces to this jigsaw puzzle are enough to fill an airplane hangar. The CIA wanted it that way. In a nutshell, there were multiple smoke-and-mirror maneuvers to make Lee Harvey Oswald a scapegoat tied to all the right people, in order to instigate the war the military-industrial complex wanted all along. Smoking gun evidence abounds in the following stories that show the CIA's fingerprints all over the Kennedy assassination, putting Oswald in several locations at the same time and blowing their cover.

The Warren Commission alleges Oswald was in Mexico City from September 27 to October 2 of 1963 at the Soviet and Cuban embassies, both of which were under constant CIA surveillance. The CIA had also tapped phones at both embassies. According to the CIA's version of the tale, on one call placed to the Soviet embassy on October 1st translated from Russian into English, a man who called himself "Oswald" spoke broken Russian and asked to speak with Valery Vladimirovich Kostikov regarding a telegram to Washington.

Kostikov was the KGB's chief assassinations expert in the Western Hemisphere, and was incredibly prominent in US intelligence circles, just as Osama bin Laden was prominent in those same circles in the late 1990s. This means that if the "Oswald" who made the call actually was the president's accused assassin, this would have deeply implicated the Soviet Union in the plot to kill Kennedy. However, the caller was an impostor, since the real Lee Harvey Oswald lived in Minsk for two years and was fluent in Russian, whereas this caller spoke broken Russian.

The October 9 cable from the CIA's Mexico City bureau to the headquarters in Langley not only described the suspicious call to Kostikov, but also mentioned photos taken of a 6-foot-tall, 35-year-old balding male with an athletic build entering and leaving the Soviet embassy on October 1. Langley cabled Mexico City on October 10, describing the Lee Harvey Oswald who defected to the USSR in 1959 as a five-foot-ten, 24-year-old man who weighed 165 pounds, with wavy light brown hair. Whoever it was entering the Soviet embassy that day, it definitely wasn't Oswald.

On October 10, the CIA cabled the FBI, the State Department, and the Navy about the information received from Mexico City the day before. But the CIA made no mention at all of Oswald's reference to Kostikov, despite the prominence of the name. In "JFK and the Unspeakable," Jim Douglass argues that the CIA kept this highly-sensitive information from other agencies until Oswald, through his multiple CIA connections in Dallas and elsewhere, could be secured in a location directly above Dealey Plaza on November 22.

Another story of dueling Oswald appearances is documented in "JFK and the Unspeakable." Ralph Leon Yates, a refrigeration mechanic for the Texas Butcher Supply Company in Dallas, picked up a hitchhiker while taking the Beckley Avenue entrance to the R.L. Thornton Expressway at 10:30 AM, on the morning of Wednesday, November 20, 1963. In one of several statements to the FBI, Yates said the man he picked up was carrying a brown paper package roughly 4 feet long. When he told the man he could put the package in the back of his truck, the hitchhiker said the package contained curtain rods, which he preferred to carry himself in the cab. In testimonies following the assassination of Kennedy, Yates told the FBI the man looked almost identical to Lee Harvey Oswald.

While making small talk with the hitchhiker, Yates mentioned that people in the city were excited about Kennedy's upcoming visit. According to the FBI's citation of Yates's story, the hitchhiker suddenly became a fountain of conversation, asking Yates if he thought someone was capable of assassinating the president. After Yates said he believed it could be done, the hitchhiker then asked if it could be done from the top of a building or out of a window, high up. Yates again answered that he thought it was possible if the shooter had a good rifle with a scope.

The notes from the FBI's conversation with Yates detailed the rest of the odd conversation, during which the hitchhiker suddenly pulled out a picture of a man with a rifle, asking Yates if he thought the president could be killed with a gun like that one. Yates said he was driving and didn't look at the picture, but answered yes. Then the mysterious rider asked Yates if he knew the president's route. Yates answered he didn't, but knew that the route was in the paper. Then the hitchhiker asked Yates if he thought the route might be changed at the last minute. Yates told him no, unless there were safety concerns.

The hitchhiker asked Yates to drop him off on Houston Street, and Yates took him to the Elm and Houston intersection. Yates told the FBI the last he saw of the man was as he walked across Elm Street, in the direction of the Texas School Book Depository. After the odd encounter, Yates told co-worker Dempsey Jones about the hitchhiker. The FBI interviewed Jones for confirmation, and Jones told investigators that before the assassination happened, Ralph Yates definitely described picking up a hitchhiker "who discussed the fact with him that one could be in a building and shoot the president as he, the president, passed by."

Normally, this would add up to an open-shut case fingering Oswald as the assassin. The highway entrance on Beckley where Yates picked up the hitchhiker was on the same street as Oswald's rooming house on 1026 North Beckley. Yates dropped the hitchhiker off close to the place where Oswald worked. The hitchhiker fit Oswald's physical description, and the entire conversation reeked of an apparent assassination plot. But this apparent Oswald sighting directly conflicted with the Oswald sighting the Warren Commission decided to include in their final report.

Buell Wesley Frazier, one of Lee Harvey Oswald's co-workers at the Texas School Book Depository, testified to the Warren Commission that Oswald asked to ride home with him to Irving on the afternoon of Thursday, November 21, 1963. When Frazier asked Oswald why he wanted to ride with him on Thursday instead of Friday, when he stayed with his wife, Marina and their two daughters at Ruth Paine's house on the weekend, Oswald said, "I'm going home to get some curtain rods … [to] put in an apartment."

Frazier and his sister, Linnie Mae Randle, testified that Oswald left his house with a 2-foot-long brown package the following morning, and explained that the package contained curtain rods when he was asked about it. The Warren Commission therefore decided that the package, though far too small to carry a rifle, even when broken down, was the rifle Oswald allegedly smuggled into the Texas School Book Depository on the day of the assassination.

The FBI called Ralph Leon Yates back in to re-tell the story of picking up the hitchhiker on December 10, 1963, and January 3 and January 4, 1964, this time with a polygraph, or lie detector test. Each time, the polygraph test results came back "inconclusive," meaning that while Yates's story wasn't a lie, the FBI wasn't satisfied with the final result. The FBI recommended Yates immediately go to Woodlawn Hospital (Dallas's most prominent mental institution). They didn't have him committed, but rather made the recommendation, and Yates drove himself there, accompanied by his wife, Dorothy. After an episode in which Yates briefly escaped from Woodlawn, he was committed to Terrell State Hospital east of Dallas, where he lived for 8 years. He then spent a year and a half at the Veterans Hospital in Waco, and then in Rusk State Hospital for the last 18 months of his life.

Yates, drifting from institution to institution, never worked again, and his family was left impoverished. He died of congestive heart failure at age 35. Yet the whole time, Yates insisted that this minor story of picking up one unnamed hitchhiker on a Fall day was the reason the president was killed, and refused to recant it. Ralph Yates's wife, Dorothy, remembered a very puzzling statement from the FBI after Yates' final polygraph test.

"They told me that he was telling the truth [according to the polygraph], but that basically he had convinced himself that he was telling the truth. So that's how it came out. He strongly believed it, so it came out that way."

Jim Douglass theorizes in "JFK and the Unspeakable" that because Yates's alleged Oswald sighting happened during a time when the real Oswald was already at work, proving that the Oswald Yates picked up was a double, it became necessary for the US government to throw Ralph Yates under the bus. Yates's story, which he corroborated to both his wife and his co-worker, directly conflicted with the official story the government wanted the Warren Commission to tell. For the tenuous narrative to seem legitimate, Yates had to be discredited.

Still with me? Here's where it gets weird.

Air Force Sergeant Robert Vinson was an accidental witness to an Oswald double's secret flight out of Dallas on the day of the shooting. Vinson was upset that despite his diligent work for NORAD (North American Air Defense Command) at Ent Air Force Base in Colorado Springs, he hadn't been rewarded with a promotion, so he took a spontaneous flight to Washington DC on November 20, 1963, to demand an answer from his superiors.

On November 21, Sergeant Vinson met with a Colonel Chapman in the basement of the US Capitol about his promotion. During their meeting, Vinson remembered Col. Chapman, a liaison officer between Congress and the Pentagon, taking a call and telling the person on the other line that he "would highly recommend the president not go to Dallas, Texas, on Friday because there had been something reported." After Chapman finished the call, he assured Vinson his promotion would be considered.

On the morning of November 22, Vinson went to Andrews Air Force Base with the intent of coming back home to Colorado Springs by nightfall. He gave an airman at the check-in counter his name and serial number, asking to be alerted when the next plane bound for the area would be departing, "if anything should come through that you don't have a notice on." Roughly 15 minutes later, Vinson was paged to the hangar, where he boarded a C54 plane that bore no markings or serial numbers other than a strange brown logo on its tail, of an egg-shaped earth crisscrossed with grid lines.

After boarding the empty plane, Vinson noticed two men in olive drab overalls board the plane and close the cockpit door without even saying a word to Vinson. Sergeant Vinson found it odd that he wasn't asked to sign a flight manifest, as he had always done when riding Air Force planes. A little after the C54 took off, an unemotional voice announced over the plane's intercom system, "The president was shot at 12:29."

The C54 headed due South, and after another few hours, Vinson watched the Dallas skyline approach through the window around roughly 3:30 Central. Once the C54 landed in Dallas, the pilot emerged from the cockpit and opened the passenger door, whereupon two men in off-white construction overalls quickly boarded, after running there from a Jeep that was already backing away from the site. Sgt. Vinson recalled one of the men was between 6' and 6'1", looked Cuban, and weighed between 180 and 190 pounds. A shorter Caucasian man also boarded, whom Vinson estimated was between 5'7" and 5'9" and weighed between 150 and 160 pounds. The plane took off and headed West without anyone else on the plane saying a word to Vinson. Sgt. Vinson figured the silence of the crew was part of the mission the crew was on, and kept quiet during the flight.

When the plane landed again around sunset, Vinson approached a guard shack and asked an air policeman where he was. The AP told him he was at the Roswell Air Force Base in New Mexico. Vinson was trying to get downtown so he could take a bus back home, but the AP informed him the base was locked down and nobody could get in or out. Vinson thought this was especially strange, given that his plane had just landed with no interference.

By November 23, Robert Vinson was back home with his wife Roberta, watching the news on the assassination that evening, after telling her about his odd flight home. When Lee Harvey Oswald's face appeared on the news, Robert said, "That guy looks just like the little guy who was on the airplane."

"Are you nuts?" Roberta asked. "It couldn't be him. He's in jail."

"I swear that's the little guy who got on the plane," Vinson insisted.

"Well, keep quiet about it," Roberta said.

After Jack Ruby murdered Oswald, Vinson vowed to keep quiet about what he saw. But he had still given his name and serial number to the airman at the Andrews Air Force Base check-in counter, and by Spring of 1964, when Vinson had been promoted to technical sergeant, federal authorities had tracked him down. Neighbors told the Vinson family that the FBI was interviewing residents about them, specifically about the Vinsons' conversation topics in recent months. Vinson's commanding officer made him sign a secrecy statement, and Roberta, for the first time as an Air Force wife, had to fill out a personal history form and sign an additional secrecy statement.

In November of 1964, Vinson was ordered to go to Washington and call a number for further instructions upon landing. After making the call, Vinson was told he would be spending the better part of a week at CIA headquarters in Langley, where he would soon undergo multiple physical and psychological tests. At the end of the fifth day, Vinson was interviewed by a semi-circle of men shrouded in darkness, who offered Vinson a job with the CIA. When Vinson refused, they offered him lucrative bribes, which he also declined. Vinson went back home to Colorado Springs, until he was contacted again three months later.

This time, the Air Force had Vinson report to a telephone number after landing in Las Vegas. Vinson learned the Air Force had assigned him to the CIA's top-secret Blackbird SR 71 spy plane in the Nellis Mountains some 40 miles Northwest of Las Vegas. The base was renamed Site 51 after being contaminated by radiation from nearby nuclear testing sites, and focused on experimental aircraft resembling saucers. Vinson later learned that similar flying saucer experiments were being conducted at the Roswell Air Force Base where the C54 had landed on the day of Kennedy's assassination. Local lore about aliens was seen as convenient cover for the CIA's top-secret projects.

Robert Vinson spent the last year and a half of his Air Force enlistment as the administrative supervisor for base supply at Site 51. The CIA supplemented Vinson's Air Force income with monthly cash payments, which both Vinson and his wife suspected was the agency buying their silence about what Sgt. Vinson saw when he boarded the wrong plane on November 22, 1963. When Vinson asked an Air Force sergeant at Site 51 about the origin of a rust-colored egg-shaped Earth logo on the tail of a C54 landing at Site 51, the sergeant said, "CIA."

Vinson kept quiet for 20 years as he and his wife quietly lived and worked in Wichita, Kansas. In 1976, Robert Vinson told a lawyer friend about the secret he had been keeping, who then told Vinson, "Don't tell a soul. For your own safety." Vinson followed his friend's advice until the passage of the JFK Records Act in 1992, and subsequently went on Wichita's KAKE-TV Channel 10 to tell the story to Larry Hatteberg. His story was so popular with viewers that the interview was re-broadcasted several more times. Vinson's story of watching the CIA fly an Oswald double out of Dallas and the subsequent purchasing of his silence and complicity has since been chronicled in the book "Flight From Dallas" by Wichita civil liberties attorney James Johnston and journalist Jon Roe.

While there's not enough space to get into it here, the testimonies of Dallas mayor Wes Wise, auto mechanic T.F. White, concession stand operator Butch Burroughs, and hobby shop owner Bernard Haire, along with the stories of Sergeant Robert Vinson and Ralph Leon Yates, all prove the sightings of more than one "Oswald" seen in different places at the same time. This is the biggest indicator of the CIA failing in an attempt to force a particular narrative around a particular person, inadvertently drawing more attention to themselves as a result.

13. The Warren Commission Report was a cover-up

Even though the Warren Commission was investigating the alleged assassin of the president who had extensive knowledge of top-secret military intelligence programs, pertinent questions were noticeably absent from the panel.

From September 1957 to November 1958, Oswald was a radar operator for the Marines at the Atsugi Air Force Base in Japan. The base was also the CIA's main base of operations in the Far East, one of just two bases where top-secret U-2 spy planes took off on missions over China and the Soviet Union. Oswald had a "crypto" security clearance, which is higher than top-secret, giving him license to regularly listen to radio communications from U-2 flights.

Former Marine Corps lieutenant John Donovan told the Warren Commission that Oswald "had the access to the location of all bases in the West Coast area, strength of all squadrons, number and type of aircraft in a squadron, who was the commanding officer, the authentication code of entering and exiting the ADIZ, which stands for the Air Defense Identification Zone. He knew the range of our radar. He knew the range of our radio. And he knew the range of the surrounding units' radio and radar."

As Jim Douglass would write in "JFK and the Unspeakable," Donovan was dumbfounded that the Warren Commission omitted all questions related to Oswald's work with the top-secret U-2 planes before defecting to the Soviet Union. After his questioning, Donovan asked a Warren Commission lawyer, "Don't you want to know anything about the U-2?" The lawyer responded, "We asked you exactly what we wanted to know from you and we asked you everything we wanted and that is all. If there is anything else we want to ask you, we will." When Donovan asked another witness to Oswald's work with the U-2 if he was asked anything about it, he said, "No, not a thing."

Given the obvious omission of critical questions about the alleged assassin of the president and turncoat's knowledge of top-secret US military operations and programs, and the CIA's flubbed attempt to tie that alleged assassin to Cold War opponents in elaborate smoke-and-mirror games, the Warren Commission's ruling that Oswald acted alone has to be taken with a grain of salt.

According to Michael Beschloss, editor of the now declassified Johnson Tapes, CIA director John McCone briefed LBJ at 9:20 AM the day after the assassination. McCone spoke about "information on foreign connections to the alleged assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, which suggested to LBJ that Kennedy may have been murdered by an international conspiracy." At 10:01 that same morning, FBI director J. Edgar Hoover called the newly sworn-in president, where they had this exchange:

LBJ: "Have you established any more about the visit to the Soviet embassy in Mexico in September?"

Hoover: "No, that's one angle that's very confusing, for this reason – we have up here the tape and the photograph of the man who was at the Soviet embassy, using Oswald's name. The picture and the tape do not correspond to the man's voice, nor to his appearance. In other words, it appears that there is a second person who was at the Soviet embassy down there."

LBJ suspected that the assassination was not carried out by the USSR and Cuba with the help of Oswald as the CIA suggested. In fact, the conversation between Hoover and LBJ had the implication that it may have been facilitated by the CIA itself, given their mishap in Mexico City that led to dubious Oswald sightings.

LBJ knew, given the evidence of Oswald impostors in Mexico City, which puzzled even J. Edgar Hoover, the first option was most likely implausible. The second option meant opening up a whole new can of worms the nation wasn't prepared to face, so the only feasible option was for the Warren Report to obscure the truth, label Oswald a lone wolf assassin, and call it a day.

14. JFK's assassination was supposed to happen in Chicago, not Dallas

Chicago was originally where Kennedy was to be assassinated. Had the plan succeeded, Thomas Arthur Vallee would have been the famous alleged assassin whose name would be remembered forever, rather than Lee Harvey Oswald.

On November 2, 1963, Kennedy was set to appear at the Army/Air Force football game in Chicago at 11:40 a.m. At the Chicago Secret Service Bureau, Special Agent in Charge Maurice Martineau informed agents about reports of assassins on October 30. Martineau was repeating a tip from the FBI, in which an informant identifying as "Lee" talked about a four-man sniper team of "rightwing para-military fanatics" with high-powered rifles, who would shoot at Kennedy as his motorcade was driving from O'Hare down the Northwest Expressway, around a slow loop off the highway exit of what is now ironically known as the JFK Expressway.

The tip from "Lee" wasn't the only one. A landlady at a Northside boarding house called the FBI after she saw four men check into the house, each with a scoped rifle, and carrying a map of Kennedy's motorcade route. The FBI then called the Secret Service office in Chicago, who searched for the riflemen. Two of the would-be assassins were found and detained for several hours for questioning, while the other two got away. The names of the two would-be presidential assassins are still unknown to this day, as the Department of the Treasury, which oversees the Secret Service, mysteriously destroyed all records of the Chicago plot when the Assassinations Records and Review Board asked for them in 1995, more than three decades after the incident.

In the meantime, the Secret Service had to respond to another tip about an ex-Marine named Thomas Arthur Vallee, who had been reportedly talking about shooting the president when he came to Chicago. Vallee was a paranoid schizophrenic, a disaffiliated member of the famously right-wing, anti-Communist John Birch society, collected guns, and was described as a loner. As a Marine in the Korean War, Vallee was injured by a mortar blast, was subsequently committed to several mental institutions, and received full disability benefits from the Veterans Administration. Like Oswald the expat turncoat, Vallee the mentally disabled fit the preferred profile of the lone wolf presidential assassin.

Vallee's apartment was raided in his absence, and FBI agents found an M1 rifle, a carbine rifle, and 2500 rounds of ammunition. The Secret Service instructed Chicago Police to put 24-hour surveillance on Vallee and "get him off the street." Vallee was pulled over and arrested by CPD officers Daniel Groth and Peter Schurla on the morning of November 2, as his 1962 Ford Falcon made its way toward the expressway on Kennedy's motorcade route. The officers cited a missed turn signal as the result of the arrest. Upon seeing a hunting knife in the front seat of the Falcon, they charged Vallee with carrying a concealed weapon, and a search of his trunk yielded 300 rounds of ammunition.

Vallee's connections to US intelligence soon came out. His New York license plates read 31-10RF. NBC Chicago employee Luke Christopher Hester learned of the arrest and asked Hugh Larkin, his father-in-law, to have a background check done on the plates by his former colleagues in the NYPD. The plates came back "frozen," meaning that only US intelligence agencies could retrieve the classified information associated with Vallee's registration.

Officers Groth and Schurla went on to have prominent intelligence careers. Groth led the December 4, 1969, raid on Black Panther leaders Fred Hampton and Mark Clark, who were both assassinated by police. Hampton was just 21, and Clark was 22. The families of Hampton and Clark, as well as Black Panthers who survived the raid, would successfully sue Daniel Groth and local, state, and federal agencies in 1983 for a $1.85 million settlement. While under Oath, Groth admitted that J. Edgar Hoover's FBI specifically requested the raid on Hampton. Officer Schurla became a high-level intelligence officer at the Chicago police headquarters.

Like Oswald, Vallee also worked on the CIA's top-secret U-2 planes in Japan. Vallee told investigative journalist Edwin Black that his U-2 work was at Camp Otsu, but that he also helped the CIA train Cuban exiles to kill Fidel Castro at a CIA base in Levittown, Long Island. Oswald did similar work at a CIA training camp in Lake Pontchartrain, close to New Orleans. Vallee worked near a third floor window at IPP Litho-Plate, at 625 West Jackson Boulevard, directly above where the presidential motorcade would pass. Oswald worked on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository, in front of where the Dallas motorcade would pass. It isn't hard to see how the CIA blazed a path for both men to be set up as scapegoats in their elaborate plot to assassinate JFK.

15. The real shooter in Dallas was on the grassy knoll, and carried a Secret Service badge

Ed Hoffman, a 27 year-old deaf-mute who prided himself on his acute sense of sight, took a detour from a scheduled visit to the dentist on the morning of November 22 to catch a glimpse of Kennedy. Hoffman inadvertently witnessed the shooter on the Grassy Knoll fire the fatal shot from his vantage point on the bridge just above the freeway on Kennedy's limousine route, and took note of the two getaway cars that transported the assassin and his assistant after the act – one was a white four-door, and the other was a light green Rambler station wagon.

Hoffman finally told his story, with the help of a sign language interpreter, to Jim Marrs in 1989 for his book "Crossfire." Hoffman had made many attempts to tell the FBI, going against the urging of his father and his uncle, who was a Dallas police officer, to keep quiet for his own safety. One such attempt ended in federal investigators offering Hoffman a bribe of $500 to keep quiet, which Hoffman refused. Next, agents paid a visit to Hoffman's father and interrogated him about his son's story. Wanting to protect his son's life, Frederick Hoffman would only say, "I don't know if Ed saw what he saw." FBI agents then manipulated their report to suggest that Hoffman's own father dismissed his son's story, in an effort to discredit critical evidence.

In "Crossfire," Hoffman described watching two men behind the wooden stockade fence at the top of the grassy knoll. One of them was a stocky man in a dark blue suit, which Hoffman called "the suit man." The other was standing by the railroad switch box, and was taller and thinner, wearing a railroad worker's clothes. Hoffman called him "the railroad man." Hoffman thought the pair were peculiar, seeing as they were clearly working together but dressed very differently.

According to Hoffman, the suit man would occasionally walk over to the railroad man and confer with him for a moment before going back to his original position. As the presidential limousine approached, Hoffman watched the suit man talk to the railroad man a final time before walking back to the fence, bending over, picking up an object, and looking back over the fence. When Hoffman saw a puff of smoke emerge from where the suit man was standing, he assumed it was a cigarette. But when the suit man turned, he was holding a rifle. The suit man ran to the railroad man and threw him the rifle.

The railroad man disassembled the rifle with a twist, put it in a railroad workers' bag, and ran north along the railroad tracks while the suit man strolled casually along the side of the fence. A police officer ran around the fence, pointing a revolver at the suit man, who held out his empty hands. The suit man then produced identification from his coat pocket, the officer lowered his gun, and the suit man blended into the crowd and walked over to the passenger door of the light green Rambler station wagon. The getaway car drove out of the parking lot on the North end of the Texas School Book Depository, and made a right on Houston Street. Hoffman then looked down at the splayed body of JFK in the back seat of the presidential car as it passed directly below him, and noticed a gaping wound in the president's right rear skull, which he said resembled bloody Jello.

The Dallas police officer Hoffman saw approach the suit man at the wooden fence after the shooting was Joe Marshall Smith, who would tell his superiors he immediately smelled gunpowder near the fence. Smith later told the Warren Commission that the man he approached had Secret Service credentials that looked real enough to satisfy him and the deputy sheriff who was with him. Smith would later recall that the man who produced those credentials wore a sports shirt and sports pants, had dirty fingernails, and hands like an auto mechanic. In a nutshell, he definitely didn't fit the bill of an actual Secret Service agent.

Gordon Arnold, a 22-year-old soldier in uniform, also witnessed a man behind the wooden fence with Secret Service credentials, right around the same time Officer Smith approached the fence, but just before the assassination. Arnold planned to film the president's arrival, and was walking toward the railroad bridge to have an ideal vantage point. When walking behind the wooden fence, he described seeing a man in a civilian suit wearing a sidearm standing guard, brandishing a Secret Service badge, and telling him to leave the area. Arnold walked along the front side of the wooden fence, and paused to shoot his film.

In the book "Crossfire," Arnold recalled feeling the whiz of the bullet pass by his left ear, coming from the wooden fence just a few feet behind him. Arnold then heard the report of the rifle, and immediately hit the ground, having just crawled under live machine gun fire as part of the basic training he had recently completed. Arnold recalled hearing another whiz over his head, and another crack of a rifle report. He then remembered seeing a man standing over him, waving a long gun, acting hysterically, and demanding the film in his camera. When Arnold tossed it over to the gunman, the gunman removed the film from the camera and threw the camera back to Arnold. And just as Officer Smith said, Gordon attested that the man with the rifle had noticeably dirty hands.

Other witnesses described aggressive activity from men near the wooden fence. Jean Hill said men who identified themselves as Secret Service agents confiscated photos she took of the motorcade when she ran behind the fence at the top of the grassy knoll. Deputy Constable Seymour Weitzman told the Warren Commission that he gave "one of the Secret Service men" a piece of the president's skull that he had found in the street. There is overwhelming evidence that men with Secret Service badges confiscated all evidence from nearby witnesses just before and after the shooting.

16. CIA employee Sidney Gottlieb made Secret Service credentials

In 2007, the CIA finally declassified its "Family Jewels" report as the result of a Freedom of Information Act request that had been in limbo for 15 years. A damning 1973 memo from Sidney Gottlieb, chief of the CIA's Technical Services Division, is buried in the 702-page document. In the memo, Gottlieb talks about how he "furnished this [Secret] Service" with "gate passes, security passes, passes for presidential campaign, emblems for presidential vehicles; a secure ID photo system." However, Secret Service agent Abraham Bolden, who was part of the investigation into the Chicago assassination plot, stated that when Secret Service books were all replaced in January of 1964, it was done by the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. The Department of the Treasury has jurisdiction over both the Secret Service and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, not the CIA, meaning that Gottlieb's orders were for an unknown covert purpose rather than providing standard identification for Secret Service agents.

Thus, the complex and intricate plot to kill Kennedy was carried out by multiple alphabet agencies, acting on what they believed were righteous motives to remove an obstructionist president in the way of a war they felt had to be waged. But the suggestion that a government agency would covertly kill its own president to advance a cause isn't that radical. Our CIA has been behind the assassinations of world leaders both before and after the Kennedy assassination, from Mohammed Mossadegh in Iran in 1953, to Salvador Allende in Chile in 1973. Just as with JFK's assassination in 1963, our runaway intelligence agencies have repeatedly shown they won't let any elected leader stand in the way of their goals.

On December 22, 1963, exactly one month after the assassination, former president Harry Truman published a precisely worded op-ed in the Washington Post about the need to rein in the same agency he created with the stroke of his pen after World War II. He wrote:

"For some time I have been disturbed by the way the CIA has been diverted from its original assignment. It has become an operational and at times a policy-making arm of the government. This has led to trouble and may have compounded our difficulties in several explosive areas ... There is something about the way the CIA has been functioning that is casting a shadow over our historic position and I feel that we need to correct it." - Harry S. Truman

Three weeks before his op-ed was published, which was met with absolute silence from the media, Truman had written more urgently-worded notes that are still preserved in the Truman Library:

"[The CIA] was intended merely as a center for keeping the president informed on what was going on in the world at large and the United States and its dependencies in particular … it should not be an agency to initiate policy or to act as a spy organization. That was never the intention when it was organized."

The recent NSA leaks by Edward Snowden, and our government's brutal response to his attempt at transparency, give just an inkling of how far our government is willing to in lying to the public and suppressing the truth. In the aftermath of Snowden's revelations, some have suggested that we repeal the Patriot Act. But real justice for Kennedy and the countless other victims of the massive intelligence and military apparatus of the US government can only come about by repealing Truman's National Security Act of 1945, which created the CIA and the NSA. And if we don't push for it using all the earth-shattering new knowledge that people like Jim Douglass and Ed Snowden have armed us with, this same specter will continue to haunt all future presidencies to come



Carl Gibson, 26, is co-founder of US Uncut, a nationwide creative direct-action movement that mobilized tens of thousands of activists against corporate tax avoidance and budget cuts in the months leading up to the Occupy Wall Street movement. Carl and other US Uncut activists are featured in the documentary "We're Not Broke," which premiered at the 2012 Sundance Film Festival. He currently lives in Madison, Wisconsin. You can contact him at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , and follow him on twitter at @uncutCG.

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+50 # David Starr 2013-11-22 10:38
VERY good piece by Carl Gibson.

In his book "Plausible Denial," Mark Lane also brought out a hell of a lot of info regarding the JFK assassination.

Lane got testimony from a woman who was Fidel Castro's former lover. She was once a CIA asset. The CIA told her that Castro wanted to kill their child; it was bullshit.

She testified in abstentia, fearing that if she appeared in court, the CIA would do away with her.

She mentioned that Frank Sturgis and E. Howard Hunt, two other CIA assets, were involved in the assassination.
 
 
+24 # John S. Browne 2013-11-22 21:08
And don't forget that E. Howard Hunt's son, a resident of Eureka, California at the time (his unusual first name I can't recall now), got his father to admit his involvement on his deathbed a few years ago; not widely published of course, so most people don't know about it. E. Howard Hunt knew he was going to die anyway, and no longer had to worry about being assassinated for divulging his involvement in Kennedy's assassination, so he admitted it.

In fact, though he didn't admit this, E. Howard Hunt's was probably the ultimate kill-shot of JFK, the one that blew the back of his head off, from the front, and from the Grassy Knoll.
 
 
+18 # karenvista 2013-11-23 17:29
Quoting John S. Browne:
And don't forget that E. Howard Hunt's son, a resident of Eureka, California at the time (his unusual first name I can't recall now


His name is St. John Hunt and you're right. His confession should have been headlined in all our newspapers but remember, they are all CIA managed under "Operation Mockingbird."
 
 
+1 # John S. Browne 2013-11-24 02:18
Yes, thank you. Now I recognize the name. "Al CIAduh(!)" probably figures that, as long as it's kept non-mainstream, most "Amerikans" won't believe it anyhow; and they're probably right. Most people reading this probably refuse to believe it. I wonder if St. John is still in Eureka (I and my youngest sister used to live there at different times; and, actually, my sister, who I don't speak with anymore, may be back there last I heard), or if he had to go underground. Do you know?
 
 
-1 # Glen 2013-11-26 06:21
It was published in Rolling Stone.
 
 
-1 # John S. Browne 2013-11-26 20:45
I wasn't aware of that, but I'm very glad to hear it. I don't regularly read that publication, but only "here and there", or "now and then". (I loved it back in the '60s and '70s.)
 
 
+7 # Rita Walpole Ague 2013-11-26 05:30
"...not widely published of course..." Amazing how five words can say sooooo much.

I'll never forget the grief and fear that surrounded me, as I stood with journalist brothers, as the J.F.K. killer details came in over the press wire in the Daily Illini newspaper at Champaign-Urban a's Univ. of Illinois. Each of us in-training journalists sensed that we had just lost an undercover war, and that this beyond egregious assassination would effect us all, certainly for the rest of our lives.

Pres. Ike was braver than brave, with his warning to us of the MIC (absolutely including C.I.A.) power grab. Our so revered martyr, Pres. JFK, was heading us away from that power grab, that now has so overtaken us in today's quashed democracy, with rule of law, peace, liberty and justice for all now gone bye bye.

Jump on board the JEK, RFK, MLK courage and dedication train we must, if ever we are to...UNDO THE EVIL COUP.
 
 
+13 # Anarchist 23 2013-11-23 14:12
It is all there in 'JFK and the Unspeakable' with footnotes! Check out the video 'Revision of History' as well..all Original tapes from the event as well as comments both then and now about it and perceptions...o ur 'Official State History' is one of slight of hand and eye!
 
 
+26 # WestWinds 2013-11-22 10:59
"Bear with me, because it's about to get really confusing. The pieces to this jigsaw puzzle are enough to fill an airplane hangar. The CIA wanted it that way. In a nutshell, there were multiple smoke-and-mirro r maneuvers to make Lee Harvey Oswald a scapegoat tied to all the right people, in order to instigate the war the military-indust rial complex wanted all along. Smoking gun evidence abounds in the following stories that show the CIA's fingerprints all over the Kennedy assassination, putting Oswald in several locations at the same time and blowing their cover."

Okay, here the author, Carl Gibson, asserts that it is the CIA and other alphabet agencies that were responsible for JFK's demise. However, this is at odds with the Thom Hartmann/Lamar Waldron version which asserts that it was Louisiana Mafia crime boss, Carlos Marcello, who not only ordered the hit, bringing in two assassins from Marseille, France, in through Canada and down through the US, to Louisiana, who was solely responsible for the hit.

Because we have two different takes on the story, I can only conclude we don't have all the facts, yet.

Personally, I believe it was the CIA and FBI because they had already become investment class assets and also George H. W. Bush was already in the CIA, not as Bureau Director, yet, though.

I also believe the Mafia involvement but involved having been contracted to do the job by the CIA/FBI in case something went wrong they would have a cover.
 
 
+20 # David Starr 2013-11-22 14:22
@WestWinds: Further good points regarding the Mafia. The latter had a private monopoly of casinos in pre-1959 Cuba. Kennedy wouldn't give air support to the Cuban exiles for the BOP invasion; which the Mafia could have benefitted from.

Then, there's Jack Ruby, who had mob connections, killing Oswald; the latter probably had a lot to reveal regarding the assassination, although not being directly involved in the killing.

Given JFK's defiance as Gibson details, the Right, the Mafia, military, intelligence agencies had motive. With this gang of four, it sounds like a "gangland" killing.
 
 
-83 # George D 2013-11-22 16:18
I can say with certainty it was Martians. Oh; I know it sounds crazy but there is overwhelming proof that, back in the sixties, thousands of reports about UFO's were being generated. They wanted us to "take them to our leader". And the rest is history.

To date, nobody has ever said anything about Martians being guilty of killing JFK and there is overwhelming evidence that the government tried to even hide the fact that they were here and walked among us.

Yep; Martians. No doubt about it. LOL!
 
 
+65 # Firefox11 2013-11-22 17:13
Quoting George D:
I can say with certainty it was Martians. Oh; I know it sounds crazy but there is overwhelming proof that, back in the sixties, thousands of reports about UFO's were being generated. They wanted us to "take them to our leader". And the rest is history.

To date, nobody has ever said anything about Martians being guilty of killing JFK and there is overwhelming evidence that the government tried to even hide the fact that they were here and walked among us.

Yep; Martians. No doubt about it. LOL!


Obviously, you were not old enough at the time of the assassination to understand what the consequences were for the country, and how shocking it was to see it all play out on television. For those of us who were, it was, and is, no joke.
 
 
+6 # Nominae 2013-11-23 14:45
Quoting Firefox11:
Quoting George D:
I can say with certainty it was Martians...... No doubt about it. LOL!


Obviously, you were not old enough at the time of the assassination to understand what the consequences were for the country, and how shocking it was to see it all play out on television. For those of us who were, it was, and is, no joke.


Absolutely ! And tho I realize that our 26-yr-old author most likely did not write his own headline for this article, these facts are "mind-blowing" only to those who have not been hearing them, ad infinitum, beginning about mid 1964.
 
 
-35 # George D 2013-11-24 13:40
Is that "obvious"? Maybe anything you agree with is "obvious" and that's the reason that only a handful of "all knowing" people, like yourselves, have failed to convince the "uncaring" and "apathetic" millions of people, that your ridiculous theories are worth pursuing.

This article and the comments that followed were not even worthy of a "debate". That's the reason I mocked it with my comments. As another post pointed out, "today we have the Internet and sophisticated cameras etc" and still, oddly enough, the bad guys get away with all of these events. Hmmm; These people must be super humans or geniuses beyond comprehension.
Oh. That's right. They aren't geniuses or you wouldn't have discovered all this evidence. The rest of the nation is just full of blithering idiots that don't care about anything in their world at all; Except for video games and iPhones. Am I getting closer to what makes you tick now?

As I said; Not worthy of debate with tin foiled hat wearing people, like yourselves. Hey; Now there's a stereotype that seems to fit well :-)
 
 
+2 # Firefox11 2013-11-25 19:29
Quoting George D:
Is that "obvious"? Maybe anything you agree with is "obvious" and that's the reason that only a handful of "all knowing" people, like yourselves, have failed to convince the "uncaring" and "apathetic" millions of people, that your ridiculous theories are worth pursuing.

This article and the comments that followed were not even worthy of a "debate". That's the reason I mocked it with my comments.-)


If so unworthy of debate, then why are you bothering, seems there is debate; mocking anything is not an answer; what anyone agrees with is not the point, much research has been done and is cited
here and in other articles and books; so, just because you or others disagree does not make it so either. The whole point is to look at the evidence and consider other possibilities besides the official version. Bad guys do not have to be superhuman, just resourceful and organized. Many homicides are never solved. In the 1981 case of kidnapped and murdered Adam Walsh, which was publicized immediately and extensively investigated, only a deathbed confession convinced police that they had found the killer years later.
 
 
+64 # AreYouMadEnoughYet 2013-11-23 02:26
Quoting George D:
I can say with certainty it was Martians


As one who grew up in the midst of this horrific event (and the killings of Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr.) Can I just say you have clearly not been on the planet long enough to even glimpse the truth of the significance of what has happened here? I might add that your response reflects that change directly.

This event changed the nature of our nation - and Your response here, so sadly, reflects this change perfectly and is only more evidence of its heartbreak. Cynical, derisive, intolerant and belittling. It's the new American Way of the 21st Century, apparently. Sickening.

My family's and my life changed on November 22, 1963. I was 6 years old. My parents and everyone I knew adored our President. He was asking us to build a better country and we were determined to do so.

We wanted peace, an end to the 'Cold war', tolerance. We didn't hate any people for their race, color, creed or religion.

We wanted to build an America we could be proud of.

Egalitarian. Honest. Truth seeking. Tolerant. Loving. Productive. Willing to Cooperate and Share and End Poverty and Create a Just Social Order. We BELIEVED STRONGLY in these convictions, and so did our President.

Your 'humor' is a disturbing but direct evidence of the cynicism which has replaced the open minded and vulnerable willingness of the American psyche to be accountable and present. It is a sad commentary, indeed.
 
 
+12 # ChickenBoo 2013-11-23 13:04
Excellent post. Amen to that! Our country truly took a down ward turn with the loss of this one great man. I was a child too, when this happened, but the gravity of it hit my soul. He will never be replaced.

Quoting AreYouMadEnoughYet:
[quote name="George D"]I can say with certainty it was Martians


This event changed the nature of our nation - and Your response here, so sadly, reflects this change perfectly and is only more evidence of its heartbreak. Cynical, derisive, intolerant and belittling. It's the new American Way of the 21st Century, apparently. Sickening.

My family's and my life changed on November 22, 1963. I was 6 years old. My parents and everyone I knew adored our President. He was asking us to build a better country and we were determined to do so.

We wanted peace, an end to the 'Cold war', tolerance. We didn't hate any people for their race, color, creed or religion.

We wanted to build an America we could be proud of.

Egalitarian. Honest. Truth seeking. Tolerant. Loving. Productive. Willing to Cooperate and Share and End Poverty and Create a Just Social Order. We BELIEVED STRONGLY in these convictions, and so did our President.
 
 
+9 # reiverpacific 2013-11-23 11:33
Quoting George D:
I can say with certainty it was Martians. Oh; I know it sounds crazy but there is overwhelming proof that, back in the sixties, thousands of reports about UFO's were being generated. They wanted us to "take them to our leader". And the rest is history.

To date, nobody has ever said anything about Martians being guilty of killing JFK and there is overwhelming evidence that the government tried to even hide the fact that they were here and walked among us.

Yep; Martians. No doubt about it. LOL!


You should know, you must live on the dark side of a planet way farther out than Mars, like Betelguise 1111/2.
BTW, LOL =Lack Of Lobe-function.
 
 
-22 # George D 2013-11-24 13:44
Har har har. You are so clever.
And FYI; Betelguise is a star; Not a planet; Oh wise one.
 
 
-23 # George D 2013-11-24 13:48
And I didn't even bother to tell you that you spelled it wrong ;-)
 
 
+14 # David Starr 2013-11-23 13:04
@George D (not W?): Hey, if you're into martians, that's your business. And if you're in denial about probabilities regarding the JFK assassination, that's your problem.
 
 
-23 # George D 2013-11-24 13:54
"denial about probabilities"....
Hmmm. What if I said your "probabilities" don't rise to the level of consideration and are far from being "probable" at all? Is that denying a probability or rejecting lunacy? I guess it depends on who you ask and how much they understand about physics, weapons, and the world we live in.

And a mocking message means I'm "into Martians"? It must be hard to live with a simple mind like yours.
 
 
+5 # David Starr 2013-11-25 12:59
@George: The martian statement was sarcasm Mr. Simplistic.

What if I said that your considerations are the work of a lunatic kind of denial?

BTW, why don't you think that the assassination wasn't/isn't a conspiracy? What are your reasons (and how about a serious answer, since you contest the assertion, and not simply throwing simplistic insults around)?
 
 
+10 # Anarchist 23 2013-11-23 14:15
The Mafia were probably involved somewhere...mor e so in the killing of RFK which was done with a pistol from behind...the autopsy clearly showed this..powder burns behind right ear where fatal wound was...while Sirhan was 6 to 10 feet in front...again the 'Official State History' is all slight of hand and trick the eye! strangely Sam Giancana was killed from behind while he was standing at his kitchen stove cooking peppers just before he was to testify to the Committee on Assassinations' in 70's...
 
 
+26 # Douglas Jack 2013-11-22 19:50
Many revelations & a truck full of possibilities.

Let's regroup meta-data or what-we-know in priority order about the strongest repeating patterns. We know that;
1) a world controlling Finance-Media-M ilitary-Industr ial-Complex has a concentration of wealth & power into the hands of very few violent colonial power structures.
2) a few banking families have brainwashed themselves into artificial & pessimistic understandings of life on earth & humanity's subservient role therein. They reject nature's model & proudly promote war. Given the artificial scarcity which their extractive linear economies create, they're despondent & blame over-population.
3) Given perpetual war waged against life & humanity, they invest heavily in the Military-Industrial-Complex.
4) They own 95% of media & finance electoral campaign process for both main political parties in the USA & hence choose a majority of candidates at municipal, state & federal levels.
5) Over centuries of manipulation they place chosen pawns into all levels of corporate & government bureaucracies so that no matter who's elected, they control operation & functioning of economy & government.
6) Control extends to education, where only the most compliant minds are financed into positions of authority. As they are brainwashed so are we.
6) They've extensive assassination programs worldwide.
7) Indigenous sovereignty restores life. https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/relational-economy/8-economic-democracy
 
 
+1 # Capn Canard 2013-11-23 11:42
It does get crazy fast! But I haven't yet fully read Gibson's piece here as I have too much on my plate at the moment. However, I do want to recommend Barr McClellan's book "Blood, Money and Power: How LBJ had JFK killed". I read it and it seems plausible and with a man LBJ had a real knack for getting shit done. Of course it is just a story. ; )

BTW Barr McClellan is the father of Scott McClellan, former press secretary for W.
 
 
+2 # Firefox11 2013-11-25 19:35
Quoting Capn Canard:
. However, I do want to recommend Barr McClellan's book "Blood, Money and Power: How LBJ had JFK killed". I read it and it seems plausible and with a man LBJ had a real knack for getting shit done. Of course it is just a story. ; )
.


Scandals involving Billy Sol Estes and Bobby Baker were going to break before 1964 election, plus other dirty laundry from LBJ rise to power in Texas, so there is plausibility. Also, Barr McClellan was business attorney to LBJ and has extensive citations at the back of the book.
 
 
0 # Cassandra2012 2013-11-24 15:48
Yes, there is reasonable speculation that it was Florida mob boss Traficante who was involvcd in the CIA plot, in a recent book.
 
 
+52 # goodsensecynic 2013-11-22 11:03
Am I just getting crotchety in my old age, or is the level of awareness in your republic so low that people think the news that the endlessly repeated Eisenhower comment or the fact that the Warren Commission was a cover-up is "mind-blowing."

Everything mentioned in this article has been common knowledge for about 50 years.

Mildly interesting, however, are items unmentioned. Which future presidents, for instance, were in Dallas a day or two before the shooting ... Bush? Nixon? as well as LBJ on the day of.

And do you remember Dorothy Kilgallen? More information about her "suicide" might have actually been worth reading.

Finally, I notice that the mainstream media have circled their corporate wagons around the insistence that Oswald was the shooter and the only shooter. Yet, having attended irregularly to the coverage of the big anniversary, I have yet to hear anyone mention Frank Church and his Senate inquiry into assassinations (JFK, MLK, RFK).

Now, that's a conspiracy!
 
 
+25 # WBoardman 2013-11-22 15:16
Nixon was in fact in Dallas immediately before
the assassination, reportedly on business as a
lawyer for Pepsi -- now there's a nice, potential
euphemism, "on business for Pepsi."

Nixon flew out of Dallas the morning of the day
Kennedy was killed.

Pepsi president Donald Kendall later pleaded with Nixon
to assassinate Allende.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_M._Kendall

No smoking gun here, but aren't those some
empty shell casings under the bureau?
 
 
+19 # Farafalla 2013-11-22 17:42
See the NYT piece posted as an Opinion piece. It is a interview with a researcher on the photographic evidence of Dealy Plaza which he says proves the official account of the assassination to be wrong.

http://nyti.ms/I5PYZN

If there is any shred off evidence proving the Warren Commission wrong, then there was a conspiracy. The details provided in this RSN post are an attempt to flesh out that conspiracy. While some might take issue with some of the details, there is no doubt that Oswald was indeed a patsy and that the hit has US intelligence logistical and other support.
 
 
+8 # karenvista 2013-11-23 19:20
Quoting goodsensecynic:

Everything mentioned in this article has been common knowledge for about 50 years.

Mildly interesting, however, are items unmentioned. Which future presidents, for instance, were in Dallas a day or two before the shooting ... Bush? Nixon? as well as LBJ on the day of.



All the stories about how no one will ever forget where they were when they heard about the Kennedy Assassination leave out one interesting thing.

There is at least one person who doesn't remember what they called "The Big Event."

George H. W. Bush has publicly stated that he doesn't know where he was when he heard about the assassination.

We do.

There is at least one picture widely available of him standing in front of the Texas School Book Depository Building immediately after the assassination.

I would like to ask why more than 35 Secret Service Officers were available to protect the President that day but only ten were assigned to do so?

Meanwhile, according to a picture in the Houston Chronicle recently 27 Secret Service Agents were shown in George H.W. Bush's detail.

I would also be interested to know “Why for the first time in American history were the President and Vice-President together in the same motorcade?” According to an attorney for the House Select Committee on Assassinations.
 
 
-64 # stannadel 2013-11-22 11:15
Flying saucers too, wooo woo cookoo!
 
 
+33 # Firefox11 2013-11-22 12:17
Quoting stannadel:
Flying saucers too, wooo woo cookoo!


Why does this comment mean; that you do not think that a coup d'etat occurred on November 22, 1963?
 
 
-20 # George D 2013-11-22 16:20
That's a great point. Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're NOT out to get me. LOL
 
 
+3 # dandevries 2013-11-23 12:19
As noted by Pynchon in his proverbs for paranoids in Gravity's Rainbow.
 
 
+1 # Firefox11 2013-11-25 19:38
Quoting George D:
That's a great point. Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're NOT out to get me. LOL


"Not every conspiracy is a theory".
 
 
+29 # reiverpacific 2013-11-22 12:32
Quoting stannadel:
Flying saucers too, wooo woo cookoo!

So how is life on whatever planet you are infesting?
 
 
+2 # David Starr 2013-11-22 14:23
# stannadel: You are the walrus, cookoo ku-choo...so what about UFOs?
 
 
+16 # ericlipps 2013-11-22 16:12
Quoting stannadel:
Flying saucers too, wooo woo cookoo!

I assume this is supposed to pass for sarcasm about the very idea that JFK might have been killed as a result of a conspiracy.

As for Nixon's presence in Dallas, it gets weirder: it was none other than Richard M. Nixon who insisted on the appointment of none other than (wait for it) then-congressma n Gerald R. Ford to the Warren Commission, and Nixon's pick to replace Archibald Cox as Watergate special prosecutor was Leon Jaworski, who had been in charge of the state of Texas' investigation of the assassination.
 
 
+13 # Anarchist 23 2013-11-23 14:21
Here is some weird...Jack Ruby was an undercover informant for the FBI for the HUAC and he knew Nixon then! An FBI profiler named Ed Sulzbach was quoted 'There really aren't many coincidences in life. And to call coincidence after coincidence after coincidence a coincidence is just plain stupid.' There are So many 'coincidences around this event....
 
 
+33 # cclark2854 2013-11-22 11:17
as a citizen and a fan of actual history, i'm delighted to see you re-post this article re: the unsolved kennedy murder. no matter how much time goes by or these facts are reiterated, they seem to pass like sand through the memories of the msm journalists. i'm in dallas right now to visit the lancer conference for the first time and we who know the official lie and have the dangerous knowledge of the true suspects, we have to battle to shed the stigma we're given by the sensible folk of america. thank for telling the truth again, and again, and again!
 
 
+34 # Firefox11 2013-11-22 12:21
Quoting cclark2854:
as a citizen and a fan of actual history.... and we who know the official lie and have the dangerous knowledge of the true suspects, we have to battle to shed the stigma we're given by the sensible folk of america...


Yes, in a so-called free country, it is shameful that the truth should be considered alien, unpatriotic, and dangerous to those seeking it.
 
 
+15 # ChickenBoo 2013-11-23 13:10
What's infuriating is that we have to wait 50 years before any truth can be even MENTIONED on these crimes. Make sure all the guilty ones are either dead or nearly so. Is this the way it will be for 9-11? 12 years have passed and still, even with all the facts, no one is brought to justice. I think this pattern bears looking at. The elite can do whatever they want, and we can scream as loud as we want, but in the end...they always walk away.

Quoting cclark2854:
as a citizen and a fan of actual history, i'm delighted to see you re-post this article re: the unsolved kennedy murder. no matter how much time goes by or these facts are reiterated, they seem to pass like sand through the memories of the msm journalists. i'm in dallas right now to visit the lancer conference for the first time and we who know the official lie and have the dangerous knowledge of the true suspects, we have to battle to shed the stigma we're given by the sensible folk of america. thank for telling the truth again, and again, and again!
 
 
0 # Firefox11 2013-11-25 19:42
[quote name="ChickenBo o"] Is this the way it will be for 9-11? 12 years have passed and still, even with all the facts, no one is brought to justice.
quote
Yes, this is exactly how it is; former Senator Bob Graham wrote two non-fiction books which were heavily redacted, so he wrote a fiction book, Keys to the Kingdom, about 9/11.
 
 
+2 # Anarchist 23 2013-11-23 14:22
cclark2854: I hope it is a great convention...I really wanted to go but could not...please report on conclusions!
 
 
-26 # Philothustra 2013-11-22 11:31
Arrant empty nonsense. The whole article is empty of any real evidence. However, it recently came out that the FBI was watching and recording Oswalds calls to the Russian and Cuban embassies in Mexico City, and record Oswald saying he would kill the president if they didn't
cooperate. Hoover covered the recodings up because it showed his incompetence and effectively laid the assassination at the FBI's doorstep, just like 911.


Dorothy Kilgallen, the "mob' or FBI or CIA as a vast conspiracy, the rightwing coup (to bring in Johnson?)-all childish drivel. Kennedy was a cold warrior, Mames Bond fan who signed off on nearly a dozen CIA assassination attempts on Castro- which leave Fidel or his minions as the most likely suspect, sorry. Who would not want to kill someone blowing up cigars in his face?

The loony myth that Kennedy was secretly planning to institute a global lovefest & peaceful coexistence(wit h the Soviets and Red China?)is beyond simpleminded. JFK was handsome, witty and the devil with women. But he was gungho on the CIA

Just to prove I am not a rightwingnut, however, I will grant that 9/11 was an inside job. The Bush family even owned Securacom-- intelligence and security for WTC, and had its headquarter in Building 7. I was there on the South Tower viewing the week before, AND THE SECOND BIG ELEVATOR WAS OUT SERVICE INEXPLICABLY for days on end, while they planted the explosives.


Sorry, but that's a fact...
 
 
-9 # goodsensecynic 2013-11-22 12:23
There were all sorts of individuals and interests which would have liked to kill JFK for any number of nefarious motives.

I certainly don't know which (or which combination) actually organized/execu ted the assassination. The list of suspects is too long and the possible combinations too complex for my modest little mind.

At least in the JFK case, however, there is ample evidence of motive, means and opportunity to make a case against anyone from Sam Giancana to J. Edgar Hoover (which, after all, isn't all that big a gap).

Thinking that skepticism regarding the Warren Commission is "nonsense" and "drivel" while having no trouble attaching apparent blame to the Bush family for the events of 9/11 seems to me to be a tad odd.

Means and opportunity, perhaps - though I'm no architect, engineer or explosives expert. But what's the motive?

To provide an excuse to invade Afghanistan?

Sorry, but I'm not persuaded.
 
 
+20 # John S. Browne 2013-11-22 21:41
Come on man, the motive(s) is and/or are obvious; to destroy the real targets, the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights, turn the U.S. into more and more of a totalitarian militarized police state with no True Liberty and Freedom, destroy U.S. sovereignty, and bring the U.S. entirely under global government enslavement, etc.; the former of which is already a fait accompli as a direct result of the "new Pearl Harbor", 9-11, of the "Fourth Reich", corporate-fasci st, globalist "Project for a New (World Order) American Century". In other words, so far it's worked like a charm because it was just what the powers-that-be, the shadow government, needed in order to complete their long-conceived plans to destroy the U.S. and finalize the creation of total world government, and absolute global enslavement under corporate-fasci sm (the MIC, or military-indust rial complex, the "Fourth Reich"), of which the assassination of JFK was a part.

They could not let JFK hinder their plans and their time schedule, because something like 9-11 was planned well in advance, with every nuance of it methodically worked out so most "Amerikans" would refuse to believe that it is was the inside job that it had to have been, and that it was; carried out by the U.S. shadow government and factions of the U.S. government itself, the former of which have been cementing their place(s) in control of the actual U.S. government for many decades now as a Trojan horse to bring it down from within, right on time.
 
 
+10 # Firefox11 2013-11-23 13:06
Quoting goodsensecynic:
while having no trouble attaching apparent blame to the Bush family for the events of 9/11 seems to me to be a tad odd.

Means and opportunity, perhaps - though I'm no architect, engineer or explosives expert. But what's the motive?

To provide an excuse to invade Afghanistan?

Sorry, but I'm not persuaded.


motive for 9/11...http://e n.wikipedia.org /wiki/Project_f or_the_New_Amer ican_Century
 
 
+6 # Anarchist 23 2013-11-23 14:24
The actual operators are always hidden but the 'usual suspects' were complicit.
 
 
+24 # Firefox11 2013-11-22 12:38
[quote name="Philothus tra"]Arrant empty nonsense. The whole article is empty of any real evidence.

Just because you disagree does not make other points of view wrong.

There are books available with extensively researched investigations which challenge the official viewpoint of the Warren Commission: such as Jesse Ventura, James W. Douglass, Peter Dale Scott, and many others.
 
 
+17 # Firefox11 2013-11-22 17:25
Quoting Philothustra:


The loony myth that Kennedy was secretly planning to institute a global lovefest & peaceful coexistence(with the Soviets and Red China?)is beyond simpleminded. JFK was handsome, witty and the devil with women. But he was gungho on the CIA


First of all, people can change, grow, turn (teshuvah), which is what this Presidency was all about. Learning and growing and improving.
Second, listen to the American University speech June 10, 1963 and you will hear the practical steps that JFK was taking toward creating a more peaceful world.

http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/jfkamericanuniversityaddress.html

VIDEO - June 10, 1963 - John F. Kennedy's Commencement Address at American University, Washington D.C. - http://youtu.be/jrspHo8uvmg
 
 
+9 # John S. Browne 2013-11-22 21:22
Very right about 9-11, and very wrong about Kennedy. Had Kennedy not been assassinated, and had he been successful in reigning in, if not destroying "al CIAduh(!)", 9-11 probably never would have happened [unless, of course, "al CIAduh(!)" was unsuccessfully reigned in and/or eliminated, and continued to exercise its shadow government power(s)].
 
 
+30 # reiverpacific 2013-11-22 11:35
I wasn't in the USA at the time (I was a dedicated anti-US/Vietnam and anti-Trident nuclear submarines in Scotland's Holy Loch leader) but was in Barcelona when I read the news on the headline boards "¡Ha Muerto Kennedy!" joining the crowd gathered in front of an electronics shop to see the whole thing via the Zapruder movie, feeling the same shock as most others around the world, almost expecting nuclear war to break out any day, with no idea that JKF had formed back door alliances with both Kruschev and Castro post-Cuban Missile Crisis to work out a nuclear disarmament treaty, and decided to pull ALL troops out of Vietnam on returning from Dallas.
Even with my youth-limited first hand knowledge of US affairs (except that I saw the country even then as the main warmonger and danger to world peace), I was aghast at the Warren Report when it was published and have been reading deeply on the subject (and RFK's subsequent murder) ever since.
To me, the best in-depth accounts of many is James W. Douglass' amazingly researched "JFK and the UNSPEAKABLE. Why He Died and Why it Matters" which with James De Eugenio's "Destiny Betrayed -The JFK, Cuba-Garrison Case" give a clear, up-close overall picture of a hugely complex plot and allows the reader to form a pretty clear picture involving Allen Dulles, J. Edgar Hoover, The CIA, the Mob, US military revealing the fallacy of the Warren Report -just for a start, the JFK-fired and hating Dulles was one of those on the commission!
 
 
+30 # Firefox11 2013-11-22 12:15
[
To me, the best in-depth accounts of many is James W. Douglass' amazingly researched "JFK and the UNSPEAKABLE. Why He Died and Why it Matters" which with James De Eugenio's "Destiny Betrayed -The JFK, Cuba-Garrison Case" give a clear, up-close overall picture of a hugely complex plot and allows the reader to form a pretty clear picture involving Allen Dulles, J. Edgar Hoover, The CIA, the Mob, US military revealing the fallacy of the Warren Report -just for a start, the JFK-fired and hating Dulles was one of those on the commission!

All Americans should read JFK and the Unspeakable so as to be able to understand why the country is virtually ungovernable at this point. Unfortunately, for many people, the truth behind the JFK assassination is unspeakable.
 
 
+27 # reiverpacific 2013-11-22 12:28
Quoting Firefox11:
[
To me, the best in-depth accounts of many is James W. Douglass' amazingly researched "JFK and the UNSPEAKABLE. Why He Died and Why it Matters" which with James De Eugenio's "Destiny Betrayed -The JFK, Cuba-Garrison Case" give a clear, up-close overall picture of a hugely complex plot and allows the reader to form a pretty clear picture involving Allen Dulles, J. Edgar Hoover, The CIA, the Mob, US military revealing the fallacy of the Warren Report -just for a start, the JFK-fired and hating Dulles was one of those on the commission!


All Americans should read JFK and the Unspeakable so as to be able to understand why the country is virtually ungovernable at this point. Unfortunately, for many people, the truth behind the JFK assassination is unspeakable.

I'm also convinced that Obama was taken aside on his first inauguration and warned about a similar fate, as in "OK bubba- this is how things REALLY work here -or remember JFK, RFK, MLK!" -and I'm no conspiracy theorist.
 
 
+26 # hankgeorge 2013-11-22 16:51
There is evidence to suggest Obama attended the Bilderberg conference in Northern Virginia the summer before the election. It is likely, assuming this is true, that he was advised he would be "allowed" to be president on the condition that he drop many of his espoused views and conduct his affairs in a manner satisfactory to this gaggle of transnational economic criminals.

Looking at what Obama has done in office, this hypothesis has merit.

Like countless others, I am gravely disappointed by the President Obama became because much of what he has done is completely the opposite of what we expected when we gave him campaign money and worked for his cause on the street.

Like many of you, I now accept with great sadness the reality that this country, if indeed not the western world, is run by a "shadow government" consistent with the ranks of the nefarious Bilderbergers (which, one hastens to add, includes Kissinger and Bill Clinton).
 
 
+8 # karenvista 2013-11-23 19:38
To misquote Woody Allen-"I wouldn't want to belong to a club that would have Henry Kissinger as a member."
 
 
+3 # Firefox11 2013-11-22 16:52
Yes.
 
 
+2 # John S. Browne 2013-11-22 21:55
Nope. Obama and his family have long been part of "al CIAduh(!)", and he was groomed to be the president that he is, and to also, in clear "double-speak" (or what I call, "backwards- and/or reverse- speak") fashion, say and promise the exact opposite of everything that he was actually going to do, and is doing. He is an insider who was "Manchurianized " and is carrying out everything just as his "Fourth Reich" globalist masters want him to do, according to plan and right on schedule.

Most of you probably won't believe me now, but watch what happens and you'll end up realizing the truth of this relatively soon.
 
 
+27 # JohnBoanerges 2013-11-22 11:40
Towards transparency, end all black budget sectors of the government. Just sayin...
 
 
+9 # Firefox11 2013-11-22 12:13
Quoting JohnBoanerges:
Towards transparency, end all black budget sectors of the government. Just sayin...


Of course, something that Ron Paul has been trying to do for decades: Audit the Fed. Then see where the loopholes are. War on Drugs helps to fund black ops yet U.S. is pointing its finger at other countries. Wonder why.
 
 
+9 # James Marcus 2013-11-22 11:47
The Military/Indust rial Complex is 'run' by, and Profited by,…. whom?
Though everyone involved gets 'A Piece of The Action', including the Big Banks (& Bankstas) who 'Channel It All', and, certainly, The Prominent Perps (Killers and Poly's), and the 'Intelligence Wonder Kids', who 'Assure Complete Obfuscation' (except, Reality Speaks Louder than The News)
Guess who? from Kennedy (and prior), right through to Obama….?
Follow The Money!
 
 
+9 # tenstring 2013-11-22 11:52
Reading Peter Janney's "Mary's Mosaic" -- good stuff -- this article and that book are in sync, pretty much --
 
 
+1 # Pickwicky 2013-11-22 12:35
I am unable to intelligently comment on C. G.'s article because I have no way of knowing if it's right or wrong--and the same goes for the Warren Report. It seems clear and interesting, however, by observing the paucity of thumbs up and thumbs down, that I'm not the only one confused about who caused JFK's assassination.
 
 
+22 # Firefox11 2013-11-22 12:58
Quoting Pickwicky:
I am unable to intelligently comment on C. G.'s article because I have no way of knowing if it's right or wrong--and the same goes for the Warren Report. It seems clear and interesting, however, by observing the paucity of thumbs up and thumbs down, that I'm not the only one confused about who caused JFK's assassination.


The confusion is purposeful by those who committed the crime. They knew it would be investigated so there are many false leads planted ahead of time; nonetheless, it is possible to think outside the box. This week on ABC news there was a segment about Jean Hill, a Dallas schoolteacher, "the lady in red", who was standing on the side of the road in Dealey Plaza as the President's motorcade passed in front of her. She hear six shots, not three, and saw a second gunman behind her on the grassy knoll. http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/jfk-conspiracy-theories-20944629
 
 
-1 # Pickwicky 2013-11-22 16:29
Ah, an eye-witness. But we all know how faulty such testimony can be. I'm sure whomever did the crime tried to cover their tracks. Anyone who wasn't there has to rely on what is said and written about the incident--even those who were there sound confused about how many shots and from what direction. Writers and researchers may have personal axes to grind, others may be persuaded by false accounts--the possibilities are nearly endless. None of us have all the facts. So if you believe one theory is correct that is your privilege, but remember: beliefs may be true or false.
 
 
+14 # karenvista 2013-11-23 19:52
So let's just all give up and pretend it never happened! That would solve the problem of a string of assassinations and a coup, wouldn't it?

Well, the majority of people don't believe the Warren Commission and the largest two groups think that the CIA and the Mafia are #1 & #2, totaling about 60%.

Very few people have ever believed the Warren Commission.
 
 
-5 # Pickwicky 2013-11-24 15:34
The conjunctive conclusion you drew--"let's all give up and pretend . . ." from my remarks above is invalid. Moreover, unless your next sentence is sardonic, it is also fallacious.

All the Trobiand Islanders believed with all their might that the Earth was flat. So much for who believes what.
 
 
+2 # Fred999 2013-11-22 14:42
You do realize, that 500 thumbs up + 500 thumbs down = 0.
 
 
-3 # Pickwicky 2013-11-22 16:30
Yeah, Fred!
 
 
+3 # karenvista 2013-11-23 19:47
Quoting Pickwicky:
I am unable to intelligently comment on C. G.'s article because I have no way of knowing if it's right or wrong--and the same goes for the Warren Report. It seems clear and interesting, however, by observing the paucity of thumbs up and thumbs down, that I'm not the only one confused about who caused JFK's assassination.


It takes many good books, years of study and cross-referenci ng - OR you can buy Jesse Ventura's book "They Killed Our President" which is a pretty thorough Cliff Notes version of most of the important information with links, footnotes and YouTube videos that will give you information that would otherwise take more time than you'd be willing to give.

If you buy an iPad or Kindle version you can just click on the links and go directly to the sources. "JFK and the Unspeakable" is liberally quoted among many other good books.

If you haven't been interested enough by now to research it, that would be a short-cut.
 
 
+12 # angelfish 2013-11-22 13:14
So sad. We have met the enemy...and he is US!
 
 
-28 # YellerKitty 2013-11-22 13:25
No one ever sold a book saying "The Warren Commission Report was right."

"The mills of the Gods,
Grind exceedingly slow,
But grind exceedingly fine..."
~Euripides (485-406 BC

After 50 years, during which the mills have never ceased turning on this issue, there is still nothing of any real substance to either prove or disprove that Oswald, a known nut job, acted alone. Until someone comes up with something more substantial than hearsay, coincidence and innuendo, I'll go with the Occam's Razor theory.
 
 
+23 # Fred999 2013-11-22 14:40
"No one ever sold a book saying 'The Warren Commission Report was right.'"
I guess Bugliosi, Posner, O'Reilly and Mailer never sold a book then.

"hearsay, coincidence and innuendo." A conspiracy has been proven by every type of evidence, including eyewitness testimony, photographic, acoustic, videographic, ballistic, documentary, olfactory, attempted reenactment, medical testimony and documentation, recordings, and the confessions of several people involved in the conspiracy. The 50 year old fairy tale has been proven to be physically impossible in dozens of ways. The fact is, nothing will convince someone who has a religious faith in the government, a closed mind and their head permanently in the sand.
 
 
-9 # Pickwicky 2013-11-22 16:35
Fred 999 Because you believe it doesn't make it so. All the 'evidence' you list could be flawed. One flaw and the entire theory swallows itself by the tail.
 
 
+7 # Firefox11 2013-11-22 18:04
Quoting George D:
Ah; Now you're ruining all the fun.
I don't often see posts on RSN that sound as worthy of ridicule as tin-foil hat Tea Partiers, but lately this site and these people have shown a very wacky side to themselves.

You have to remember; Many of them think guns are evil beings bent on killing us all, one by one. There is no way they would understand the points that you have cited.

So let them believe in the conspiracy theories and fill in all the blanks with tidy, made up data, or have their religions and beliefs, and I'll just keep thinking it was Martians :-)
It's as sound of an argument as any of the others are.

Quoting Pickwicky:
Fred 999 Because you believe it doesn't make it so. All the 'evidence' you list could be flawed. One flaw and the entire theory swallows itself by the tail.

Make up your mind, "all the evidence could be flawed"-doubtfu l and/or "One flaw and the entire theory...."-is this your rule?
 
 
+15 # ericlipps 2013-11-22 16:18
Quoting YellerKitty:
No one ever sold a book saying "The Warren Commission Report was right."

"The mills of the Gods,
Grind exceedingly slow,
But grind exceedingly fine..."
~Euripides (485-406 BC

After 50 years, during which the mills have never ceased turning on this issue, there is still nothing of any real substance to either prove or disprove that Oswald, a known nut job, acted alone. Until someone comes up with something more substantial than hearsay, coincidence and innuendo, I'll go with the Occam's Razor theory.

Doesn't it strike you as odd that after fifty years, during which the government had every incentive to prove Oswald acted alone, even you have to say it hasn't been able to either "prove or disprove" that?

And Occam's Razor argues one should choose the simplest explanation which fits the known facts. That isn't the Warren Commission version, unless quite a few items are excluded from the known facts. Even the Commission acknowledged that its work was hampered by FBI noncooperation (let alone that of the CIA).
 
 
+13 # John S. Browne 2013-11-22 22:08
And so has the 9-11 Commission acknowledged that its work was (intentionally- --that alone is a conspiracy FACT) hampered by the government. Their obfuscation of the real facts, in order to keep willful idiots, like those in this thread who are still brainwashed into believing that conspiracies virtually don't exist, believing the lies and refusing to believe the conspiracy FACTS, never changes; and, of course, continues to this day.
 
 
+5 # Firefox11 2013-11-22 17:35
Quoting YellerKitty:
No one ever sold a book saying "The Warren Commission Report was right."

"The mills of the Gods,
Grind exceedingly slow,
But grind exceedingly fine..."
~Euripides (485-406 BC

After 50 years, during which the mills have never ceased turning on this issue, there is still nothing of any real substance to either prove or disprove that Oswald, a known nut job, acted alone. Until someone comes up with something more substantial than hearsay, coincidence and innuendo, I'll go with the Occam's Razor theory.


So, are you saying that you personally have read the research that many have done, and have concluded, that there is insufficient evidence. If so, you may also want to look at the new book by Jesse Ventura, "63 Reasons..." with extensive citation of sources.
 
 
-21 # Timaloha 2013-11-22 13:41
The problem with these and other conspiracy theories like 9/11 being an inside job or chemtrails, etc, is the fact that such endeavors would take dozens or hundreds or even thousands of people to pull off. Any one of these people would become a millionaire overnight if they told a credible story with proof. People are emotional and otherwise needy animals. Remorse would set in for some, ego for others. Economic hardship or greed for others still. For whatever reason, these things would not remain secret if so many people were involved. I believe it was Twain who said, "Three people can keep a secret...as long as two of them are dead."
 
 
+21 # Glen 2013-11-22 13:53
Your Twain quote is closer to the truth than you might expect.

One other side of the issue is the research on nuclear (atomic) development. It was all done in secret and absolutely nobody knew until after the first detonation that was exceedingly dangerous to all mankind in that nobody could predict what would really happen.

Organized plans of treachery can and have been carried out many times. Folks researching the World Trade Center, for instance, have found many discrepancies in the official story, but also how it could have been pulled off without notice. Well, except for folks in those buildings who did hear odd noises and testified to that, along with folks in the lobby who were blown out into the street long before the buildings came down, including emergency workers.

At any rate, organized efforts can be pulled off. Anybody powerful enough can recruit who and what they need for their purposes. Guaranteed.
 
 
+36 # Fred999 2013-11-22 15:08
Really? So, exactly how many people have to be involved in a conspiracy before it can’t possibly be a conspiracy and reverts to being just one person involved?

How many people got us into the Vietnam war based on lies and kept us in it based on lies? Must have been one person. How about the war for Halliburton in Iraq? One person?

How many people were involved in the Manhattan Project? Watergate? The Tuskegee Syphilis Study? The Iran Contra Affair? The Plot to Assassinate FDR? The human plutonium injection experiments at Strong Hospital in Rochester NY? The LSD experiments on drug addicts in the 50s and 60s? Must be all one person?

These have all been accepted as fact by the mainstream press. The difference in the JFK conspiracy is not that no has talked. Hundreds of people have talked: shooters, mafioso, ex-CIA agents, people involved in the cover up, witnesses, and people who talked to Oswald and Ruby. The difference between the endless accepted conspiracies and the JFK conspiracy is that, in this case, the mainstream media hasn’t told you that it’s true yet.

In other words, your litmus test for the truth comes not from the strength of the evidence but from a governmental controlled media that, for some unknown reason, you still believe to be independent and dedicated to the truth instead of profit or some other ulterior motive.

Why are a million documents still being kept secret from you, and even more have been destroyed. Because Oswald did it alone?
 
 
+17 # hankgeorge 2013-11-22 16:56
It all comes down to this, Fred 999: if the official story is true, why, as you say, have all the relevant documents either been massively redacted or withheld entirely?

National security????

This is the answer you would give a child...and a particularly dumb one at that!
 
 
+16 # Firefox11 2013-11-22 18:52
[quote name="Fred999"] Really? So, exactly how many people have to be involved in a conspiracy before it can’t possibly be a conspiracy and reverts to being just one person involved?



According German author Mathias Broeckers, in his new book, this is the speech that marked JFK for death. "JFK had made a radical change while president, from a classic cold warrior to a policy of reconciliation and peace. He had made angry enemies in the military and the CIA and when he announced to end the cold war in his speech on June 10th 1963 he finally was marked to death."
 
 
+7 # soularddave 2013-11-23 23:21
Quoting Firefox11:

According German author Mathias Broeckers, in his new book, this is the speech that marked JFK for death. "JFK had made a radical change while president, from a classic cold warrior to a policy of reconciliation and peace. He had made angry enemies in the military and the CIA and when he announced to end the cold war in his speech on June 10th 1963 he finally was marked to death."


Sadly, I think you're on the money here. The countervailing powers had figured out that their efforts to maintain lucrative wars had been foiled, and this speech marked the point where peace was possibly at hand. The public had been notified, although in a reserved manner, but something had to be done or lots of powerful people would "lose" money. Their cash cow was in grave danger of dying.

It sure seems like more than one assassination plot was hastily contrived, and as we know, at least one succeeded. Following that, the Ruby murder happened, eliminating an avenue of investigation forever.
 
 
+12 # Firefox11 2013-11-22 17:41
Quoting Timaloha:
The problem with these and other conspiracy theories like 9/11 being an inside job or chemtrails, etc, is the fact that such endeavors would take dozens or hundreds or even thousands of people to pull off. Any one of these people would become a millionaire overnight if they told a credible story with proof. People are emotional and otherwise needy animals. Remorse would set in for some, ego for others. Economic hardship or greed for others still. For whatever reason, these things would not remain secret if so many people were involved. I believe it was Twain who said, "Three people can keep a secret...as long as two of them are dead."

BTW Howard Hunt, Jack Ruby, and others have tried to discuss the details....also , as in Al Quaeda, all the parts of the puzzle do not necessarily know one another, or the bigger picture.
 
 
+11 # John S. Browne 2013-11-22 22:12
They and their families would quickly be dead, too; and they know this. Plus, most of them are totally in favor of what was done, and will remain so no matter what. Most of them are part of a cabal that has absolutely no expressible doubts about what they are a part of, and what they are carrying out. They believe in it unquestioningly , and do not ever want to be seen as betraying that cabal, death for doing so or not. The rest have been, or are being, eliminated.
 
 
+11 # tigerlille 2013-11-23 01:26
Timaloha, hundreds of people have talked, and there is credible evidence that has proven over and over again that the purported story is false. You have a case of willful ignorance. We may not know the exact plot, but we know enough to establish that the CIA! FBI, the military, and organized crime were all involved. And the powers that be keep using exactly the same strategies over and over again that were utillized to murder JFK. One thing they are not is original. We are a nation of dullards.
 
 
+12 # karenvista 2013-11-23 20:46
Yeah, my father worked at Oak Ridge Y-12 on the Manhattan Project. 130 thousand people worked at numerous facilities like that and had no idea what the final product was going to be. Some of them didn't find out until 50 years later.

It's called "COMPARTMENTALIZATION."

Everybody went to work every day and did their jobs. If it was to fit certain pieces of pipes, that's what they did. If it was to put coded labels on meters. that's what they did.

It worked the same way on 9/11. There were numerous times in the months prior to 9/11 when construction or demolition on certain floors in the towers was going on. There was a complete elevator renovation which gave workers access to all the elevator shafts. There was a "power down" turning off all electricity and security systems the weekend before that left both towers open due to "recabling."

There were Dick Cheney's "National Security" exercises going under names like "Vigilant Guardian" that drew almost all fighter aircraft away from their east coast stations to Canada and Alaska and kept them from being available to intercept any hijacks. And to top it all off there was the NORAD war game that inserted fake radar blips on the Air Traffic Controllers' screens so they couldn't tell if a plane was on their screens or not, as they said- "Is this real or is it 'exercise?'"

And a guy in a cave did all that on his own.
 
 
+26 # geraldom 2013-11-22 13:43
There are so many conspiracy theories right now on JFK's assassination, it's totally confusion, but there is one thing that is totally irrefutable. Based on the Zapruder film, the final shot that blew JFK's head off, without any doubt, came from the front, not from behind.

After JFK was shot from behind and he grabbed his chest, he bent forward. But, when the second shot was fired that hit him in the head, his head initially was pushed backwards. There is no way in hell that if that shot came from behind as the official story claims, that his head would have initially moved backwards. No way!!
 
 
+18 # Glen 2013-11-22 14:25
Yes, and there were even news reps who testified even lately that they heard more than one shot. Their story skewed somewhat after they learned of the presentation by the government.

Never forget the fact that the original autopsy reports "disappeared" right along with immediate reports by locals who were there.

Yes, it is complicated, but the pieces may be organized to reveal the truth, as so many other plans with ulterior motives, including Hitler's, may be. The powerful are capable of more than most citizens will admit.
 
 
+6 # Firefox11 2013-11-23 10:43
Quoting Glen:


Yes, it is complicated, but the pieces may be organized to reveal the truth, as so many other plans with ulterior motives, including Hitler's, may be. The powerful are capable of more than most citizens will admit.


Excellent point. Mostly, people are not able to conceive of something that they have not experienced personally; hence, the powerful can do all sorts of things without detection or accountability.
 
 
-10 # truthbug 2013-11-22 14:32
Quoting Harold R. Mencher:
There is no way in hell that if that shot came from behind as the official story claims, that his head would have initially moved backwards. No way!!


Harold, I once saw a ballistics demonstration where a bullet was fired into a melon or some such object, and the object does sometimes rebound in the direction from which the bullet entered. The explanation is that, when the bullet enters the object through a small hole, it pressurizes its contents. Then, when the bullet exits, the object's contents gush out through a much larger hole, and the momentum of that gush has the same effect as the momentum of fluid ejected by a rocket, overpowering any other tendency to rebound that the bullet's transit provides. Think about that. If you're scientifically inclined, I think you will have much to ponder. It usually takes a great deal of pondering of facts before one alters deep seated beliefs, as erroneous as they may be.
 
 
+6 # Anarchist 23 2013-11-23 14:30
Yes, and just as in the demonstration, in this case, the contents of Kennedy's head gushed out...from behind..doctors in Parkland described it as a 'bloody crater'
 
 
+2 # Glen 2013-11-24 06:48
Right, Anarchist23, but most early reports have disappeared right along with some film footage showing Kennedy holding his throat. The folks attempting to explain the rebound of Kennedy's head haven't paid enough attention to the actual wounds and early reports.
 
 
-8 # arquebus 2013-11-22 15:00
"There is no way in hell that if that shot came from behind as the official story claims, that his head would have initially moved backwards. No way!!"

Have not done much hunting I see.
 
 
+1 # keenon the truth 2013-11-23 19:04
@arquebus

I'm very happy to know that Harold R Mencher has 'not done much hunting'. His posts are always very sensible and my image of him does not include a gun-touting hunter.
 
 
+4 # karenvista 2013-11-23 20:54
Harold-"There is no way in hell that if that shot came from behind as the official story claims, that his head would have initially moved backwards. No way!!"

Yes, but as the 9/11 deniers say-Physics took a vacation on that one day, for that one time, in that one place. So it didn't happen the way the laws of physics requires.
 
 
+11 # geraldom 2013-11-24 00:07
Quoting karenvista:
Harold-"There is no way in hell that if that shot came from behind as the official story claims, that his head would have initially moved backwards. No way!!"

Yes, but as the 9/11 deniers say-Physics took a vacation on that one day, for that one time, in that one place. So it didn't happen the way the laws of physics requires.


You're so right, Karen. The problem with the attacks of 9/11 as far as the 9/11 deniers are concerned is that the laws of physics and statistics suspended themselves in so many ways.

On another article under RSN entitled "The Real Afghan Question: War Crimes," I referenced two URLs to one of these deniers which show high quality photos of the front lawn of the Pentagon very soon after the Pentagon had been attacked attempting to point out to him that the roof and the wall of the Pentagon did not collapse for at least 30 minutes after the building was hit. I will repeat those URLs here:

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/photos/smoke.html

The above photos are a subset of a larger group of Pentagon photos. Reference the following URL:

"Pentagon 911 Photos"
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/photos/index.html

I asked the gentleman to point out where the massive chunks of debris from a 757 commercial jetliner were indicated on the front lawn of the Pentagon since the only real damage to the bldg for 30 min was a 16ft diam hole at ground level. He totally ignored my question.
 
 
-19 # arquebus 2013-11-22 15:13
Interesting that is was a "massive conspiracy" that caused the death of JFK. Yet, no one saw a massive conspiracy in the three previous assassinations.

There were only three shots fired...what the lady in red heard were echoes.

JFK was an easy target moving directly away from Oswald at slow speed...might as well been sitting still.

Plenty of time to fire three shots from a lightly recoiling rifle.

Another shooter on the grassy knoll as evidenced by a cloud of smoke. That "cloud" might have been someone smoking a cigarette, but it was a result of gunfire unless the shooter was using a 19th black powder gun. Modern ammunition...wh ich has been around since the 1890s...doesn't generate smoke.
 
 
+11 # ericlipps 2013-11-22 16:27
Quoting arquebus:
Interesting that is was a "massive conspiracy" that caused the death of JFK. Yet, no one saw a massive conspiracy in the three previous assassinations.


Not so. The Lincoln assassination was known at the time to have been part of a conspiracy to behead the Union government by shooting not only the president but the VP and the president pro tem of the Senate (then next in line of succession after Vice-President Andrew Johnson). The other two attacks failed, but there's no question they occurred. the only real issue is whether the conspirators were operating with the active support of the besieged Confederate government. Read Jay Winik's "April 1865" for a detailed account. Only later was the story of Lincoln's assassination bowdlerized into a safe "Booth acted alone" tale.
 
 
0 # arquebus 2013-11-22 18:00
I have read Winik's book years ago. Makes some interesting observation. But, no evidence that Boothe's co-conspirators were the woman who ran a boarding house and a couple of half wits who turned out to be incapable of carrying out their plans. Probably the woman should not have been executed as her involvement was not deep.
 
 
-22 # George D 2013-11-22 16:30
Ah; Now you're ruining all the fun.
I don't often see posts on RSN that sound as worthy of ridicule as tin-foil hat Tea Partiers, but lately this site and these people have shown a very wacky side to themselves.

You have to remember; Many of them think guns are evil beings bent on killing us all, one by one. There is no way they would understand the points that you have cited.

So let them believe in the conspiracy theories and fill in all the blanks with tidy, made up data, or have their religions and beliefs, and I'll just keep thinking it was Martians :-)
It's as sound of an argument as any of the others are.
 
 
-7 # Pickwicky 2013-11-22 16:40
arquebus--That smoke from the grassy knoll only goes to show what movies have done to the 20th century mind.
 
 
+7 # Firefox11 2013-11-22 16:50
Quoting Pickwicky:
arquebus--That smoke from the grassy knoll only goes to show what movies have done to the 20th century mind.

???
 
 
+3 # bingers 2013-11-24 17:49
CBS ran a documentary reproducing the events of the day. There was a branch between the Depository window and the place where Kennedy was hit and the best snipers of the day were totally unable to reproduce the shots. And Oswald was not a marksman, barely passing his military qualification.
 
 
+15 # hankgeorge 2013-11-22 16:53
If we'd had the Internet in 1963, the truth would have gone viral.

Fortunately, we had the Internet on 9/11...
 
 
+10 # Glen 2013-11-23 07:17
And cell phones with cameras capable of close-ups of the planes, and the knowledge of what a plane crash such as in Pennsylvania would leave on the ground, AND pilots willing to do their research and join Pilots for 9/11 Truth exposing the lies concerning the Pentagon. And engineers, universities, and individuals carrying out research due to their own suspicions about the event.

All the research is available should one wish to take the time...
 
 
+4 # Firefox11 2013-11-23 09:43
Quoting Glen:
And cell phones with cameras capable of close-ups of the planes, and the knowledge of what a plane crash such as in Pennsylvania would leave on the ground, AND pilots willing to do their research and join Pilots for 9/11 Truth exposing the lies concerning the Pentagon. And engineers, universities, and individuals carrying out research due to their own suspicions about the event.

All the research is available should one wish to take the time...


From my conversations with other Americans, it seems that some have concluded that 'taking the time' is expecting too much.
 
 
+2 # Glen 2013-11-24 06:54
That includes pretty much everything Firefox, not just main events. Television is too easy and just shallow enough to fill heads.

Heck, I knew a fellow who would never listen to research coming from universities in Germany, saying they are crappy schools. *Sigh*
 
 
+9 # theshift33 2013-11-22 18:26
If there is a ring of truth in even 1 or 2 of these 16 points it brings to mind.

Benghazi? the convoluted mishmash currently surrounding it from just about every corner.

Edward Snowden

Michael Hastings

Any President of either party passing NDAA - HR1540. It gives new meaning to a buffer of protection and it's extremely powerful and unspoken message to anyone above or below him that would purposely derail the country or undermine
some of it's leadership that still have
integrity.


Didn't President John Fitzgerald Kennedy start the DIA in 1961 that put a stick in the craw of the CIA for budget dollars as well as territorial and sharing information difficulties? When the DIA started up they were known to be more transparent.

Just a few thoughts.
 
 
-4 # Activista 2013-11-22 20:33
"the caller was an impostor, since the real Lee Harvey Oswald lived in Minsk for two years and was fluent in Russian, whereas this caller spoke broken Russian"
After 2 years Oswald spoke fluent Russian? Please!
 
 
+3 # John S. Browne 2013-11-22 23:28
Oswald has, since the JFK assassination, been made to look like an idiot, but he was obviously a very intelligent person or he never would have been used as a double-agent in the first place. [Perhaps he was even actually a Russian sleeper agent in the U.S. who infiltrated and/or was recruited into the U.S. government, and that explains how he spoke fluent Russian. He also could have studied Russian for some time before he went to Russia. Either way, they decided to use him as a patsy. (He probably knew too much about a good many things; and that, as well as his knowledge about the real truth concerning JFK's assassination, is why they also had Jack Ruby execute him before he could squeal like a pig. He was a wildcard that they couldn't take the chance of not eliminating.)]

Personal note concerning you, "Activista": I have long thought that your comments showed a certain level of intelligence yourself; but comments such as this one tell me that you're not as intelligent as you appeared. I think you haven't responded to me in the past because you were afraid that it would show you up for being as truly unintelligent as you, in truth, are.
 
 
+1 # Activista 2013-11-22 23:50
"Oswald has always been made to look like an idiot, but he was obviously a very intelligent person or he never would have been used as a double-agent in the first place?"
please read:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Harvey_Oswald
quite a psychopath -
BTW John S. Browne - how many languages do you speak fluently and how long did it take to learn them? Thanks
 
 
-10 # John S. Browne 2013-11-23 00:21
All members of the PTB are sociopaths and/or psychopaths; Oswald was no exception. So, what you're saying proves nothing. And I won't even dignify your idiotic response on foreign languages with a response. As usual with you willfully ignorant people, you ignore most of the good points that people tell you, and you seek to obfuscate the truth away by doing so. You're clearly an idiot who I used to overestimate. I will not make that mistake with you again.
 
 
+5 # Glen 2013-11-23 07:20
No need to be insulting John S. Browne. We are all learning and discussing here. That is the point of articles and responses. Does one want to learn or does one just want to win.
 
 
+7 # Firefox11 2013-11-23 09:47
Quoting Glen:
No need to be insulting John S. Browne. We are all learning and discussing here. That is the point of articles and responses. Does one want to learn or does one just want to win.


Bravo Glen. That is the challenge before this country: do we want to learn or do we want to win, both domestically and internationally . The answer to that question will determine our future.
 
 
+15 # Sheila 2013-11-23 00:37
If you want to see how the Bush family was involved in all of this, read the book whose title is….I think, Bush, Family of Secrets. Amazing. It goes way back and up through Kennedy's assassination and beyond.
 
 
+18 # AreYouMadEnoughYet 2013-11-23 02:51
Reading through these comments here there are about 1% of them worth reading and the rest of them are all, as the great plan intended, people arguing for their stupid little egoistic points of view.

There are about a dozen or less coherent and well spoken real comments here; the rest of them are people defending already concluded and chosen, closed minded 'opinions' and 'Points of View' - same old same old - WE MUST MAKE NEW CHOICES - but if we are all so damned defensive and hysterical and unable to reason, think or CHANGE OUR MINDS about ANYTHING, then HOW CAN WE?

The polarity continues to become more extreme and the people more defensive. This is an excellent article. Most Americans cannot hear it because they are unwilling to feel it and know the truth of their nation: it is under the boot of the 'handlers' and this is when it all really took hold. No question.

It sucks to feel that way, but we cannot change it if we cannot admit it has happened. This is why voting is now a joke until we figure out how to fill the entire government with independents with no allegiance to any party, pac, or other 'interest'.

And of course it is what happened to Obama. They don't even need to kill you anymore, they just destroy your reputation. They've killed SO many since JFK - It's just 'what they do' now. Either that or they set you up and make a spectacle of you. It's not as if we cannot SEE that everyone who gets onto them gets clobbered somehow
 
 
+7 # Firefox11 2013-11-23 10:29
[quote name="AreYouMadEnoughYet"]
There are about a dozen or less coherent and well spoken real comments here; the rest of them are people defending already concluded and chosen, closed minded 'opinions' and 'Points of View' - same old same old - WE MUST MAKE NEW CHOICES - but if we are all so damned defensive and hysterical and unable to reason, think or CHANGE OUR MINDS about ANYTHING, then HOW CAN WE?

The polarity continues to become more extreme and the people more defensive. This is an excellent article. Most Americans cannot hear it because they are unwilling to feel it and know the truth of their nation: it is under the boot of the 'handlers' and this is when it all really took hold. No question.



Brilliantly stated, 'AYMEY', and love the user name, BTW. Exactly the conversation I was having this morning with friends; "we cannot change it if we cannot admit it has happened". I agree wholeheartedly that ...most/many Americans cannot hear it due to their unwillingness to feel and know... the oppression that we are all under
here in this country. I believe that our handlers want to divert this awareness by instituting foreign wars and conducting the never-ending "War on Terror"; i.e., "They hate us for our freedom."
 
 
+4 # theshift33 2013-11-23 13:48
"It's not as if we cannot SEE that everyone who gets onto them gets clobbered somehow."

Oh, it's more serious than clobbered. Try crushed, killed and maimed family members. That is how they control those that know too much and individuals in leadership positions that open themselves to vulnerablility through bucking the rogues or being compromised themselves.
Valerie Plame was right when she said
Edward Snowden would be harrassed and abused. Our leaders know that our failing Justice System couldn't handle
his whistleblower case without volatile
fallout. The best the straightshooter s could do was get him out of here. They will continue to feign their hunt for Snowden to bring him back but I doubt his feet will ever be on U.S. soil again.
He's a valuable intelligence asset for the still honorable dedicated investigative agents that are left to clean out the trash and mop up the messes in their fatally compromised agencies.
My apologies for going off topic.
 
 
+16 # USA2012??? 2013-11-23 06:19
Magic bullet my ass: I didn't buy it in '63, and most definitely don't buy it now no matter who says otherwise!
 
 
+3 # lewwelge 2013-11-23 08:00
And the book "Best Evidence" is also informative.
 
 
+4 # keenon the truth 2013-11-23 09:53
My eyes were not opened to the hideous activities of the CIA and other organisations until 911. (I feel embarrassed now that I was so blind)and consequently, I didn't know much about the Kennedy assassination. Reading the above article, and then all the comments, I find thoughts of the Boston Marathon bombing and the unexplained aspects of Tamerlan Tsarnaev's death and the arrest of his brother Dzhokhar Tsarnaev just won't leave me. The story seems to have 'vanished' from the media.
 
 
+4 # theshift33 2013-11-23 13:10
"The story seems to have vanished from the media."

It's their usual pattern of how they shut their infractions down. Near to complete blackout.
 
 
-19 # barbaratodish 2013-11-23 10:25
What if Jackie Kennedy wanted her husband killed due to jealousy because JFK was sexually involved with Marilyn Monroe? lol
 
 
+4 # RICHARDKANEpa 2013-11-23 11:45
Quoting barbaratodish:
What if Jackie Kennedy wanted her husband killed due to jealousy because JFK was sexually involved with Marilyn Monroe? lol

Quoting barbaratodish:
What if Jackie Kennedy wanted her husband killed due to jealousy because JFK was sexually involved with Marilyn Monroe? lol


They had a political marriage like the kings and queens in Europe did.

One could imply that everyone was involved instead of everyone being involved in stopping the war threatening lie that Castro did it
 
 
-7 # Activista 2013-11-23 23:35
Quoting barbaratodish:
What if Jackie Kennedy wanted her husband killed due to jealousy because JFK was sexually involved with Marilyn Monroe? lol

Write a book - Marilyn Monroe was a part of the conspiracy - CIA/FBI agent? .. search "marilyn monroe death" this gives you good start " Some of these theories even implicated John F. Kennedy and his brother Robert in the mysterious death." year later Kennedy dies ... seems more plausible theory than this collage of "facts" above.
 
 
0 # Glen 2013-11-24 18:29
barbara, your view is not so off base considering the dynasties within the U.S. and not so far removed from European dynasties. Jealousy and revenge was frequently in evidence within ruling parties. Why not the U.S. dynasties. Murder and coverups have been the norm in the U.S. as in any powerful empire.

However, it probably is not the case here, but not impossible that Jackie was a member of the plan to get rid of JFK, the hub. We will never know.
 
 
+9 # EmEmBee 2013-11-23 11:04
More evidence of a shadow government and the enormous power of the military industrial complex.... more reasons why we need Wikileaks and the Snowdens of the world.
 
 
+2 # RICHARDKANEpa 2013-11-23 11:42
I think that there was originally a phony link linking Oswald to Fidel Castor, with the false claim that Castro killed Kennedy to get even. This lie coming out mixed with the truth about CIA activities in Cuba.

So this lie was quickly covered over, making some think Arlen Specter, Chief Justice Earl Warren and even some of the Kennedy family part of the conspiracy to get Kennedy killed.

Somehow the truth wasn't revealed when that lie would no longer threaten war with Russia and Cuba.

If Robert Kennedy wasn't shot he could have explained it.

http://www.opednews.com/Diary/New-Revaluations-in-the-Ke-by-RichardKane-071126-438.html

If at first you don't succeed try try again, as you see from the above link I have been trying to get this possibility out for a long time
 
 
+2 # RICHARDKANEpa 2013-11-23 11:59
Sorry, I developed a bad habit of glancing, commenting then reading so my comment would not be many comments down the page
.
Thank you Carl Gibson for detailing what I have been squeaking about for years.
 
 
+2 # Firefox11 2013-11-23 12:23
Quoting Pickwicky:
None of us have all the facts. So if you believe one theory is correct that is your privilege, but remember: beliefs may be true or false.


Presumably, a proper homicide investigation conducted at the time of the crime would have yielded more facts. Since that did not occur, it has been left to writers and researchers to take on a job that should have been done by the Dallas police department, unimpeded.
Of course, "...the possibilities are nearly endless", which is why, in the absence of a proper investigation by the authorities in Dallas, the truth can only be presented piecemeal.
 
 
+11 # tomo 2013-11-23 13:18
Great article by Gibson! (A welcome relief after a week of hogwash from Scott Pelley and Bob Schieffer.)

Two things in particular. Good that Gibson began with Eisenhower. Some may think of "military-indus trial complex" as a worn-out slogan. What it names, however, is the conspiracy we are burdened with today. What's special about this conspiracy is that it functions for the most part in open air. Everybody knows that horrendous sums go into military spending; knows that businesses and universities are on the take; knows the oil companies partner with the military. Eisenhower clearly was aware of this and clearly regarded it a significant threat. He was, then, if you will, a conspiracy theorist. (As Sottile points out on consortiumnews, "conspiracy theorist" functions today principally as a means of dismissing someone.)

The second thing I particularly commend Gibson for is the attention he pays (following James Douglass) to the longstanding pre-11/22/63 relationships of the CIA and the FBI with Oswald. These relationships are retrievable through official government statements; they have in fact been retrieved by Douglass. When one understands Oswald was being handled, the big picture begins to emerge. Whether there was Mafia involvement; whether LBJ had fore-knowledge; whether this or that witness-death was consequential to a cover-up, are side issues. The big story is that the complex Eisenhower warned of terminated the presidency of JFK.
 
 
-3 # Activista 2013-11-23 23:49
When one understands Oswald was being handled, the big picture begins to emerge?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Harvey_Oswald
"Oswald was court-martialed after accidentally shooting himself in the elbow with an unauthorized .22 handgun, then court-martialed again for fighting with a sergeant who he thought was responsible for his punishment in the shooting matter. He was demoted from private first class to private and briefly imprisoned in the brig. He was later punished for a third incident: while on night-time sentry duty in the Philippines, he inexplicably fired his rifle into the jungle" sorry, but could not find "better" killer than Lee Harvey ..
Neither Warren Commission Report on the JFK Assassination or The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also known as the 9-11 Commission)are perfect, but essentials are more plausible than the conspiracy theory collage created by Carl Gibson.
 
 
-1 # John S. Browne 2013-11-24 02:48
Thank you, "Activista". Now you have proven me completely correct about you. You are a willful idiot just as I thought.
 
 
+2 # Glen 2013-11-24 18:34
Yes, Activista, power has its pleasures:

How delightful are the pleasures of the imagination! In those delectable moments, the whole world is ours; not a single creature resists us, we devastate the world, we repopulate it with new objects which, in turn, we immolate. The means to every crime is ours, and we employ them all, we multiply the horror a hundredfold.

Marquis de Sade (1740–1814), French author. Belmor, in L'Histoire de Juliette, ou les Prospérités du Vice, pt. 3 (1797
 
 
+1 # Activista 2013-11-24 23:00
Agree Glen - the power is the ultimate goal - this is why are "dictators" here and there.
Bu there is a power of powerless (Vaclav Havel) that could not be underestimated - I believe in American Spring - lived through Prague Spring ..
en.wikipedia.or g/wiki/The_Powe r_of_the_Powerl ess
 
 
+1 # Glen 2013-11-25 06:34
Sadly, that was then. This is now. The power within the U.S. would stomp any citizen effort or absorb it. 300 million people, and counting, are impossible to coordinate in that effort. A country this size, and one so complicated in its governing... where does one begin if resisting?
 
 
0 # Rixar13 2013-11-23 16:31
I was seven years old and visiting Richmond Vermont from Rutland Vermont...
 
 
+1 # jordan 2013-11-23 20:18
GREAT ARTICLE.. THANK YOU would also like to suggest anyone interested.. read ME and LEE by judyth vary baker.. who is the one in the video.. The men who killed Kennedy the love affair.. which was banned on TV.but can be seen on you tube.. the Book is excellent..
 
 
+2 # SOF 2013-11-23 21:01
It is a great article. Covers so many of the points. Also, have heard two very lengthy interviews with Jerome Corsi, who makes a lot of sense connecting the dots. His book is 'Who Really Killed Kennedy?" -there is another with a similar title. Anyway, I was 17 at the time, already paying attention. The Warren Commission held back and did not yet know plenty -it stunk and was one reason for the angry protests over Viet Nam war. A generation no longer trusted the gov -with good reason, as it turns out.
 
 
+2 # treadlightly 2013-11-24 02:26
Many great minds are given to evil.
Thankfully not all.
This story of growing corruption has unfolded seemingly in parallel with many of our lives.
This assassination does seem to be the point in our history where the military and all it's manifold departments took total control.
It is too powerful to defeat, but that power will also lead to it's destruction.
Hope the next great civilization doesn't make the same mistakes.
 
 
0 # tpmco 2013-11-24 03:36
I am curious to know more about this other Lee Oswald--the one who rode on the CIA plane from Dallas to Roswell, NM. What happened to him? If he's still alive, he'd have to be in his 70's or 80's.

Other people may have knowledge of him--like the flight crew of the plane. Obviously the plane was not crowded, and others could either confirm or dispell the testimony of the Air Force Sargeant Robert Vinson.

It's such an obvious investigative lead. Maybe it has been taken up, and I have missed it. I'm not an avid reader of books published on this topic, but no one could've pulled off the murder of JFK alone. Lee Harvey Oswald was set up. Is it even possible to get out of this school book building without being stopped? No, he was a triggerman--jus t an unknown to a demonic group who have control of many overlapping strategies designed to kill anyone, at any time, anywhere.

It's a case of look at that over here while I'm doing this over there. The USA government has been doing this to people--forever . The country still has a ways to go to figure this out--but we will, and this topic may someday lead us to do it. Thanks for the article--I appreciate it.

P.S. I went back to your link for Robert Vinson, a you-tubed interview with someone who did not mention Lee Oswald. So, I'm not convinced--what are you going to do to convince me?
 
 
-1 # Glen 2013-11-24 07:10
There are also questions concerning the perpetrators of the attack on the World Trade Center. There are countries who maintain those guys are still alive, and there is proof they, too, were trained by the U.S. and escorted into position in airports. They were in evidence in hotels prior to that event as well.

Another question is what happened to the passengers on the plane that "hit" the Pentagon, and the one that "crashed" in Pennsylvania. And that leaves out way too many coincidences. The same would be true in the plan with JFK.

Yes. Diversionary tactics are well researched and there are a great many government and media individuals willing to be on that stage.
 
 
+1 # RICHARDKANEpa 2013-11-24 16:10
I would like to thank Carl Gibson especially for two paragraphs,
“Hoover: "No, that's one angle that's very confusing, for this reason – we have up here the tape and the photograph of the man who was at the Soviet embassy, using Oswald's name. The picture and the tape do not correspond to the man's voice, nor to his appearance. In other words, it appears that there is a second person who was at the Soviet embassy down there."
LBJ suspected that the assassination was not carried out by the USSR and Cuba with the help of Oswald as the CIA suggested. In fact, the conversation between Hoover and LBJ had the implication that it may have been facilitated by the CIA itself, given their mishap in Mexico City that led to dubious Oswald sightings.”
Thank you Carl Gibson for mentioning a phony trail to Castro. Most see the world as good guys against bad, not as Shakespeare did looking at everything from everyone's point of view.
A left out fact is the Johnson expressed great fear that a phony trail to Castro would lead to war. The surprising thing about the Single Bullet Theory is that other prosecutions only propose no accomplishes, only after months looking for them.

The Warren Commission had a problem not to find a suspected phony trail to Castro while trying to find the truth at the same time. I have Arlen Specter's book “Passion for Truth”. He believes he is a great man not that I agree but too bad his suggestion of a Truth Commission after 9/11 was fought by trolls. If we had trials Cheney would have pleaded the fifth and had to get immunity to go on, and testify while Bush could rightly claim he was out of the loop and knew little of what was going on. Without looking at the world as Shakespeare did we will never know what is going on.
Thanks for your slight touch of Shakespeare.
 
 
0 # jstick 2013-11-24 17:19
The Sargent Vinson book is Flight from Dallas: New Evidence of CIA Involvement in the Murder of President John . Kennedy by Johnston & Roe. Gibson doesn't get his quote exactly right -- the two men, the "Cuban" and the Oswald look-alike, boarded the plane in Dallas The plane landed in a dry river bed, took on the two men in coveralls, and took off immediately.
Another, new book with a follow-up perspective is Hit List: An In-Depth Investigation Into the Mysterious Deaths of Witnesses to the JFK Assassination. It confirms the existence of a mop-up team of professional killers.
 
 
0 # JSRaleigh 2013-11-24 17:22
Two words explain where Oswald fits in between the CIA and the FBI - TURF WAR.

Oswald wasn't a CIA asset. The CIA only ever had one use for Oswald. He was the perfect patsy to embarrass the FBI when Kennedy was murdered.

The CIA's charter prohibits them from engaging in espionage within the United States. It's a charter provision they routinely violate even unto this very day.

Cuba was supposed to be the CIA's bastion from which they'd run their networks with impunity. Castro is the CIA's biggest shame. The Cuban Revolution would have been a failure without the CIA's backing.

But the CIA screwed the pooch. They expected that when the revolution succeeded the CIA's "Man In Havana" would displace Castro.

Didn't happen. Castro beat them at their own game. So, they're back to running their operations illegally out of the Gulf states.

Problem is J.Edgar Hoover ain't happy about it. Especially considering how deeply the Mafia was embedded in the CIA's anti-Castro operations.

Oswald was just one of many FBI informants trying to weasel his way into the CIA's front organizations operating along the Gulf coast. Oswald was KNOWN to the CIA because of his previous failed "defection" to the Soviet Union (sponsored by the Office of Naval Intelligence).

The CIA brought Oswald into the conspiracy to kill Kennedy because his FBI connection would stick a finger in J.Edgar Hoover's eye.

And I don't have to tell you which finger it was.
 
 
+2 # LandLady 2013-11-25 09:56
I also think Gibson's article is excellent; makes me realize how little I know about this and 9/11. BUT one little discrepancy: in #16 he implies that the CIA also assassinated Mossadegh, Iran's lawful Prime Minister deposed by the CIA (and the British)in 1953 after he called for the nationalization of Iranian oil. I had never heard the assassination part before; checked Wikileaks which says Mossadegh was placed under permanent house arrest for the rest of his life. Just FYI,Gibson's is still a stunning article.
 
 
0 # JohnBoanerges 2013-11-25 11:36
What ever CAN go wrong WILL go wrong, wise words from my great-great-gre at AND GREAT God grandfather, Murphy
 
 
+4 # MagnumOpus 2013-11-25 18:02
Hi,

Your missive on JFK is quite good, especially your Number 4 item. Most know about JFK's American University Speech that angered the Mil / Ind Networks heavily invested in weapons systems industry. What really set them off on the effort to kill JFK was your Number 4 item. The Y-12 nuclear weapons plant had been helping in a New Orleans effort to kill Castro using radiation and cancer virus effects coined by Dr. Alton Oschner. LHO was assisting on that project and LHO even came to Oak Ridge and left a paper trail at their Atomic Museum.

What changed the efforts from killing Castro to killing JFK was this new paradigm shift of Khruschev and JFK becoming great team for peace.

Peace was a terrible thing for the nuclear complex with billions invested in nuclear weapons production and delivery systems. There were also millions of jobs affected. Not to mention that major investors from the UK's Royalist money to the Vatican were heavily invested in weapons industries.

It was this serious knowledge that JFK and Khruschev were working on Peace and major nuclear disarmament that set all the Y-12 associate system out for JFK's blood.

They labeled him a communist, they had one of their people working with Jack Ruby to light the fuse with LBJ, and Hoover, to have JFK hit and cover it all up. At Y-12 they were highly connected with the CIA via anti-nuclear proliferation and spy methods on Russia's nuclear production.

The spark that lite the Eternal Flame.
 
 
+3 # MagnumOpus 2013-11-25 18:03
Con't from above---

Such was the Nexus for the spark the would light the JFK eternal flame.

Your number 4 shows the essential Modus operandi, that became the hit on JFK in Dallas using CIA methods, Mafia Shooters from Corsica, and even the domestic Mafia from Ruby, to Marcello, to Giancana.

JFK refused to become a Puppet for the Mil/Ind Network, and LBJ from the git-go was willing to do anything they told him to do. So, JFK was killed and replaced with highly sociopath LBJ. LBJ was so corrupt that they knew they controlled him.

Excellent Article,
Jim Phelps
 
 
-4 # Philothustra 2014-01-13 15:19
Thanks for injecting a note of sanity into this childish "collage of facts." The infantile dream about Nikita and Jack and Fidel planning to institute a new world order of peace and love...?!? When you put together the combined body count for Nikita and Mao, it goes over 50 million dead. Plus Fidel's firing squads at the Isle of Pines ...Whew! A fine lot of heroes for the loony left.

Kennedy WAS a cold warrior, he just didn't want to blow up the whole world. Johnson did not have any international war agenda- it was thrust upon by the selfsame cold warriors in the Defense Dept, Macnamara, Rusk, Chiefs of Staff-- Johnson had no interest in Vietnam or the Dulles bros plans for America. As for his alleged fear that the Russians did it? right. The rooskies kill the POTUS to overthrow the government of the US, and Johnson's first concern after becoming president-- bighearter galoot and humanitarian that he was- was worry it might start a war if we fought back.
!?!?!?! Johnson was evil but not stupid or silly. And zero interest in communism.

I especially love how the "Mafia" killed the President of the US. That's a great plan for organized crime! good way to remain under the radar! Only problem with that- if it was the CIA, how could it also be Sam Giancana, Jimmy Hoffa, Fidel Castro, a two-bit Dallas nightclub owner, the Dulles Brothers, and a Marine sharpshooter?

Make up your minds, folks.
 
 
+3 # InterestedOldGuy 2016-01-13 12:51
I've looked through quite a bit of the information out there and was most impressed by Mr Douglass' version, least impressed by Gerald Posner's..... The only real question I have is why were 2 types of ammo used and, nobody has ever explained this. The most basic ammo information out there tells the difference between full metal jackets and hollow point and it looks obvious to me, at least, that both kinds were used. And why wasn't GSR found on Oswald's face? Somebody please explain this to me.
 
 
0 # InterestedOldGuy 2016-01-13 13:19
And did investigators from any agency ever find the wrapping paper that Oswald used to hide the rifle in?
I was skeptical of how he could have fired that supposedly inferior fire arm that fast until I saw the documentary that laid out the Soviets investigation. They interviewed Oswald's wife and she told them he would constantly practice the bolt action. And as far as Posner's claim that there would not have been any smoke upon discharge of the weapon, he obviously has never been to a shooting range and seen a gun with even the slightest bit of oil fire and he forgot about the nut who fired from that tower at the university of Texas around that same time.
 
 
0 # InterestedOldGuy 2016-01-15 12:06
I've come across the answers, or at least half assed explanations for my own questions.
Read somewhere that the wrapping paper used to hide the rifle was found and didn't have a spot of oil anywhere... And that the ammo used was too large for the entry wounds.
Others have questioned the type of ammo used and it looks like a similar conclusion was arrived at.
Kennedy's head was just about blown off and the bullets recovered were incapable of that kind of damage.
So, for something I thought I had figured out, I'm left with even more questions.
I always thought Oswald had something to do with the murder, but now it seems like such a ridiculous over all situation that when asked who killed JFK, Richard Belzer answered 'who didn't kill him?'
It started with the way the Secret Service conducted or didn't conduct their jobs from the time they got to Dallas to the heavy handed way the body was stolen from the proper Texas authorities as rushed off to Bethesda and the lies and cover ups that continue to plague this and every explanation.
I honestly do not know what to believe any more and I guess that's the most desired reaction.
I do, however, have to add that I don't believe a word Jack Ruby said from the beginning until his little press briefing that started with ',the world will never know' and even if that part is true in the overall picture, he was no more a mob hit man than I am. He was an attention grabbing nobody.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN