JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

[Patrick Differ]

What witnesses saw Oswald in the 6th floor window? How credible could they be 6 stories down with a window half open and the shooter supposedly perched in the back corner of the window. And in a 6 to 10 second timeframe.

No one. A good team of Defense Lawyers would tear these witnesses apart. Oswald was seen 90 seconds after the shooting on the 2nd floor with a coke by his Manager and a Cop. Could he get from the 6th to 2nd floor in 90 seconds?
Maybe. Doubtful?

Johnson was not a Kennedy fan. Hoover was a blackmailer. The CIA expected Kennedy to support it in the Bay of Pigs which had a 30% chance of success, unless....Kennedy unleashed the Military. He didn't. He refused to risk escalation.

It is a fact that Kennedy was against regime change through assassination which the CIA was using. This is what also tied to the Mafia and their relations with the CIA. Castro the central target. The CIA relationship with the Mafia started with Mob Boss Lucky Luciano in WW2 as the MOB controlled the Ports.

RFK may have gotten his brother killed. Probably also got himself killed.

These were not choir boys. There were reasons for both Kennedys to get murdered. It was a warning by Dwight Eisenhower that unfortunately came true. War is money.

[cobalt]

War is money.

Or 'War is a Racket' as retired US military general Smedley Butler put it.

In 1933, not long after F.D. Roosevelt had been elected, Butler claimed he had been approached to act as figurehead for a proposed fascistic type regime in the USA. FDR would have been retained in a symbolic post but power was to be placed directly into the hands of the banks and the military. Since FDR was viewed by them as no more than a socialist or communist the plotters were only doing the patriotic duty. Butler spurned their offer and blew the whistle on the ones he was aware of. The media discredited his claims and since the scheme had barely advanced beyond plotting level, an inquiry into the 'Wall Street Putsch' was able to sweep the matter under the carpet.

Prescott Bush is a name which often crops up in connection with this largely forgotten event but there is no evidence that links him directly to anything claimed by Butler. Prescott's son George W. H. Bush was in Dallas on 21 November 1963 but left the following morning. As did Prescott protégé Richard Nixon. There is nothing which links either man to the events of 22 November so the fact that there were (including Johnson) three future Presidents in Dallas that day is coincidental.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I can only refer you to my previous posts. A JFK visit to Texas before the 1964 election required no psychic powers. The choice of Dallas could not have been anticipated but since JFK had lost heavily in that area to Nixon in 1960 it was an area where he needed more visibility. As a potential patsy Oswald was not confined to Dallas anyhow.



> I don't follow your logic here. The conspiracy (the one you think does not exist) succeeded on all the three grounds you mention. The POTUS was assassinated; the perpetrators were not identified; and the political shift under Johnson proved beneficial to those who backed the coup d'etat. Dulles and McCone (central figures in the WC) both had spells leading the World Bank IIRC as part of their reward.

But it’s obvious stuff Cobalt. The alleged conspirators wouldn’t have wanted anything to go wrong which might have led to the assassination failing.

Like having someone seen or photographed in an area where an assassin shouldn’t have been (like the Knoll) - Now it’s ok to say that no one actually was seen, photographed, filmed or caught but the chances of this happening couldn’t have been more obvious or more in the hands of pure chance. A spectator on the Knoll simply turning around for any reason, a camera catching something behind in the background of the image that they were capturing, someone goes to their car on the car park behind the picket fence. What you are suggesting/implying is that any the ‘conspirators’ who couldn’t have failed to have been aware of these potential issues beforehand took a kind of ‘what will be will be’ approach. That wouldn’t be believable on a minor crime so how can it be believable on the most massive crime in history.

Like having someone firing from the 6th floor (or even planting a weapon to give the impression that someone fired from the 6th floor.) What if someone had come onto the 6th floor intending to watch the motorcade from there and caught the gunman setting up? And even worse - and this is something that those that suggest that Oswald never fired the gun can’t address - what if a couple of Depository workers had indeed been on the 6th floor watching the motorcade at the time of the shooting? How would the plot have looked with them saying that no one actually fired from the 6th floor despite a rifle and shells being found?

I could write a huge list of the things that could very easily have gone disastrously wrong but how can you just write off the immense consequences Cobalt? As if these alleged plotters really did take a ‘so what if we get found out’ attitude? This is just not possible. No one would have undertaken such a massive, earth-shattering project as this with the kind of attitude with which someone might have undertaken stealing a can of beer from a corner shop? They would have wanted a plot as near to perfect as possible, with as few people involved. There’s just no way on earth that they would have left themselves the task of planting prints, faking photos, x-rays and a piece of cinefilm, setting up corrupt autopsies and corrupt commissions when all of that could have been easily avoided.

None of this makes sense Cobalt. No one would have undertaken this kind of plot. No one could possible have thought like this; no one could have had this kind of attitude. And was it the resounding success that you claim. 1. Kennedy died. 2. The majority of the population think that he was killed as a result of a conspiracy involving government agencies. 3. Nothing of significance (that would have justified the risk of killing Kennedy) changed with Lyndon Johnson becoming President.

But everything makes sense when you consider a disaffected little nobody who expected to be caught. It fits like a glove.

[cobalt]

The alleged conspirators wouldn’t have wanted anything to go wrong which might have led to the assassination failing.

I can't disagree with that.

Like having someone seen or photographed in an area where an assassin shouldn’t have been (like the Knoll) -

'Shouldn't have been' according to the WC. I've explained my position on a number of occasions: the conspiracy did not require Oswald as the Lone Gunman. That was the prerogative of the WC. If some other gunman had been photographed behind a picket fence then he could have been alleged to be a pro-Castro malcontent. (A bit like Oswald was.)

What if someone had come onto the 6th floor intending to watch the motorcade from there and caught the gunman setting up?

That's fair point, but we know that someone pretty much did! Bonnie Ray Williams was there from noon till around 12.15 and in theory might have been able to detect some activity in the sniper's nest. He didn't, for reasons that are unclear and doubtless influenced his later testimony given his unenviable position. Why he wasn't steered away, threatened or temporarily kidnapped I have no idea.

There’s just no way on earth that they would have left themselves the task of planting prints, faking photos, x-rays and a piece of cinefilm, setting up corrupt autopsies and corrupt commissions when all of that could have been easily avoided.

They couldn't be easily avoided since the conspirators did not know the line that would be taken by the WC. You are arguing back from the WC Lone Gunman theory instead of considering the assassination from the perspective of the perpetrators. A 'flurry of shells' as described by Kellerman was no problem for the assassins. If anything it might inspire an invasion of Cuba. Or as a second best, intimidate those who could work out what had actually happened. The conspirators had no fear of multiple shooters.

And was it the resounding success that you claim. 1. Kennedy died. 2. The majority of the population think that he was killed as a result of a conspiracy involving government agencies. 3. Nothing of significance (that would have justified the risk of killing Kennedy) changed with Lyndon Johnson becoming President.

1. Kennedy did not die so much as he was actually killed in broad daylight.
2. The majority can think what they want: what can they do about it? Precious little, an important lesson to learn in any plutocracy. The resistance to the coup d'état in Dallas took on a social rather than a political character, especially amongst younger Americans.
3. Foreign policy changed in regard to Vietnam and the oil concessions- dear to the Texas oil magnates- survived until Johnson stood down from office. That's a lot of money going into private pockets before we look at the likes of alleged public servants such as Dulles, McCone, Ford and Bush.

[Herlock Sholmes]

'Shouldn't have been' according to the WC. I've explained my position on a number of occasions: the conspiracy did not require Oswald as the Lone Gunman. That was the prerogative of the WC. If some other gunman had been photographed behind a picket fence then he could have been alleged to be a pro-Castro malcontent. (A bit like Oswald was.)

Perhaps Im being slow or that I’ve been inattentive but I just don’t understand this position Cobalt. Are you saying that the conspirators went to all of the trouble of finding Oswald, his rifle, the cartridges, the prints, the Tippit murder, the hand gun, the Walker evidence…all of that but they weren’t really bothered about Oswald taking the blame?

I can’t help feeling that your shaping the conspiracy to account for its fatal flaws.

[Fiver]

There were about half a dozen groups considering killing Kennedy.

Feel free to list these half a dozen groups and their motives for killing JFK.

But one group did and achieved a great deal. This group showed that the so called 'leader of the free world' could be executed in public if he defied the will of powerful economic interests. (In America they are called 'oil magnates' or 'tech entrepreneurs' whilst in Russia they are called 'oligarchs.')

Feel free to show how JFK's economic policies were harming US oligarchs and how those economic policies changed under LBJ.

[Fiver]

It is as facile a point to make as some CT saying that JD Tippit made an emotional farewell to his son on that day which proves he was 'badgeman' or connected to the conspiracy. Neither of these actions have been explained by the actors themselves so no proof is available, only supposition.

JD Tippit didn't make an an emotional farewell to his son on that day. Any source which claims that doesn't know that Tippit had two sons.

[Fiver]

60 years of conspiracy theorists tormenting the Kennedy family with goulish fantasies and totally illogical conspiracies.

It's worse for the Tippit family as many Conspiracists try to make an officer killed in the line of duty into part of a plot to kill JFK.

[cobalt]

Hi Sherlock,

As I see it there was a conspiracy and it had been arranged for Oswald to be linked to that conspiracy. But the shots that killed Kennedy did not have to be the exclusive preserve of the one rifle connected to Oswald; that was a conclusion reached by the WC (although not unanimously) for political reasons.

It's sometimes asked why the conspirators would have risked Oswald wandering around the TSBD during the assassination but I can't see the problem. He was probably on the 2nd floor during the shots but even if he had gone outside and been photographed that would not remove the links that had been made between Oswald and the Carcano rifle allegedly left by him on the 6th floor. A fellow conspirator(s), named or anonymous, could have been discovered in that instance. There were after all a number of witnesses who thought they had seen two men on the 6th floor before the shots were fired. Which makes sense really, since most assassins would welcome a spotter to guard their rear.

The picket fence area is often discounted on this site as an extremely difficult location to control if planning to shoot from there. Yet there is evidence that this is what happened. Men in suits flashing security ID badges were reported by a few witnesses, one of whom was a civilian and is widely discredited since there are no supporting photos of him even being at the scene. However that still leaves a couple of policemen, one called Smith I think, who testified to the same. Since the official position is that no secret service personnel were in the picket fence area then it is hard to consider the presence of bogus SS as anything other than nefarious.

There was no fatal flaw in the assassination itself but the conspiracy had a problem in the aftermath. Oswald was not shot dead in the TSBD, the bus he originally boarded (armed police arrived after he had left for a taxi) nor in the Texas Theatre. (Some would claim that Tippit failed to shoot him dead as well.) LHO was living a charmed life, for a couple of days at least. Had Ruby failed in the police basement then Oswald would still have had to survive the County jail.

[Fiver]

Or why Tippit was such a well known in Oak Cliff he might have stood for election to the local council.

Tippit was based out of the Oak Cliff Substation.

[Patrick Differ]

Cobalt- if you believe the Single Bullet theory has been disproven rather than proven then you have a conspiracy. Since Humes cut corners and didn't trace the shot from back to front he only aided the conspiracy theory.

The Zapruder Film , Nix Film and Moorman film show the head shot and its aftermath with a debris field to the back and left and not to the front. So if the head exit wound was forward then why wasn't the debris field ?
Because we are to believe another theory using neck spasm proven using goats and gel heads.

A Jury in 1963/1964 would have seen these films. Would there eyes deceive them because there would not be these after the fact theories or tests to support the governments theories.

The Mafia was affiliated with the CIA because of Castro. They set up regime change assassination teams and those teams were based in New Orleans under the Mafia Control of Johnny Roselli and Carlos Marcello. They called Roselli the Colonel.

RFK went after Marcello and Hoffa and deported Marcello to the jungles of Guatemala. Marcello at that point wanted to kill RFK. Before JFK was scheduled for Dallas he was scheduled for Chicago and Miami. Chicago was Giancana and Miami was Trafficanti. The Mafia, to stop RFK, decided to cut off the head of the snake- JFK. If they couldn't get him in Chicago they would get him in Miami or Dallas.

Roselli, Giancana and Trafficanti were all murdered before they had a chance to testify. Ruby was a hood from Chicago and was into gambling and prostitution which was controlled by the MOB. Carlos Marcello controlled Dallas.

Oswald never had a chance to Defend himself. Ruby was allowed free access to Oswald. That only added to the Conspiracy theories.

Any conspiracy theory would have to include the relationships that the CIA had to the Mafia. RfK was motive for the MOB.
The Bay of Pigs was motive for the CIA. Castro was motive for the CIA and Mob assassination teams. Did they turn this assassination team concept to cut off the head of the snake.

WHo benefited from this assassination?

LBJ became President. He never would have otherwise.
RFK was marginalized and assassinated in 1968.
The MOB became more powerful.
The CIA became more powerful.
The Vietnam War escalated making millions for the Military Industrial Complex and its investors.
Hoover became FBI Director for Life, instead of forced retirement.

The MOB silenced it's own. Ruby silenced Oswald.

All from 4.8 seconds in Dallas. Assassination site #3.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Question - Where is the rear head wound in the Zapruder film?

Answer - It obviously doesn’t exist.

Conclusion - There was only an entry wound to the back of the head. There is no other conclusion.

Therefore - Shots from the rear proven.

Case closed.

[Fiver]

As Warren Commission Supporters ( Herlock, Fiver) you are asking me to support what the government states is true. Beyond a reasonable doubt.

There is a key difference - you refer to it as "the government" as if it was a monolithic single entity. The government is composed of multiple organizations, many of which are rivals. Many of these organization are composed of factions, which are rivals to each other. And those are composed of individuals, each with their own goals.

I'm not asking anyone to support anything because the government, or any section of government says it's true. Neither should we reject something just because the government says it.

We need to look at the facts. I'll look at just one example - the prints. There are two possibilities - either they were left there by Oswald, or the Dallas Police, the FBI, multiple government investigations, and multiple independent experts over the course of decades were all part of a criminal plot to kill JFK.

[Fiver]

However, in the USA you are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Oswald in this case was assassinated by ( another lone nut) before he could mount a defense.

Most Conspiracists only believe in innocent until proven guilty for Lee Harvey Oswald.

Those same Cospiracist assume that everyone who supports the idea that Oswald killed JFK is guilty of murder, conspiracy, treason, perjury, evidence tampering, etc. They don't just apply that standard to Hoover and LBJ, they apply it to the Bethesda doctors, Charles Givens, the Three Tramps, the Umbrella Man, Clay Shaw, JD Tippet, and dozens of others.

[Fiver]

No. No doubt at all. It was categorically Oswald alone. The most obviously guilty man in the history of crime.

It was categorically Oswald who killed JFK. It was categorically Oswald who killed JD Tippit.

Oswald almost certainly acted alone, but I don't rule out that he might have gotten another person or two involved who promised to help, but failed or got cold feet. Anything bigger requires a Conspiracy composed of lucky idiots.

But even the small conspiracy is wildly unlikely and I've seen no evidence to support the idea.