As usual, various government officials have done all of us, and themselves, a disservice by hiding this information for so many years beyond what was necessary.
Even the Trump administration wouldn't release the remaining information when they had the chance.
The tabloid clickbait headlines don't surprise me in the least. We now live in that world.
Just imagine how much fuel they would have added to the fire if the news was reported like that in the mid-60's.
Yes, we had tabloids back then, but now almost all mainstream outlets are irresponsible hacks if they think it will pay.
Whatever the truth of the JFK assassination is, the speculations and conspiracy theories associated with the event will provide material for the tabloids and 'journalists' for at least another century.
Click bait headlines have been around forever. I recall Bill Clinton promising to release all the files back on n the 1990’s. Didn’t the House Assassination Committee in 1978 have full access to the JFK files? With regards to Oswald’s trip to Mexico lots of Americans were going to the Cuban embassy in Mexico City for visas. It’s not surprising the CIA had the place under surveillance.
In the Frontline documentary “Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald,” former CIA director Richard Helms stated that he couldn’t explain why there weren’t photos of Lee Harvey Oswald in Mexico City at the Cuban Embassy, and that there were problems with the cameras the CIA agents were using that day. I’m guessing the CIA destroyed any evidence they had that would show they could’ve prevented the assassination. I wouldn’t expect much more from any future release of documents by the CIA.
I still believe Watergate, Nixon and his advisors supposed just covering up the break in was all to do with their involvement in the Assassination parts of JFK , they were all implicated in the tapes ,the break in , also on the Bench parts or even named shooters by themselves or their Family , also Vice President Ford who took over from Nixon as President pardoned Nixon ,and Ford gave the elogue at President George W Bushes funeral stated " WE ALL KNOW THE THANKS WE ALL OWE GEORGE FOR WHAT HE DID FOR US ALL " To all the C.IA spooks involved in the cover ups of them all etc
Thanks for your comment on the JFK assassination !
As a teenager, I saw the look that came over Oswald's face, on live TV, while Oswald was being escorted to the Dallas police jail, as a reporter shouted out asking if he had killed President Kennedy. It is rarely, if ever, shown these days. That look of unfeigned utter astonishment was the self realization that he, Oswald, had become the greatest patsy of the 20th century. I've seen Jesse Ventura demonstrate the use of firing the rifle Oswald used, a clumsy bolt-action rifle which strains credulity as being the weapon used to fire several accurate shots in a short bit of time. At the time, the "news" reported the Italian name of the rifle and we all assumed it was some fancy, powerful accurate weapon an assassin would use instead of its actual status as a foreign piece of junk for rapid accurate shooting. We also noticed the Friday edition of the NY Times, the day after the assassination, referring to Oswald as the "Assassin", instead of the ALLEGED Assassin.
"Fall guy" approved and implemented.
There was so much in that pre Internet era covered up, smoothed over, so much deception.
But there is one unarguable conclusion. There was a coup that day that removed the elected leader of our government. The policies all changed, the nature of America changed after that coup and we have been dreaming of getting it back ever since. John Kennedy was no angel to be sure, but the level of his speeches, his over all intent, his disgust with the CIA and the instant wars and regime changes and the vast apparatus supporting them, all point to a President who would have enacted some great reforms had he lived. The fake named "Federal" (it is a private bank) Reserve bank continues to this day. The balancing act stealing wealth by inflation, the endless deficits to support more foreign adventures and neo-con trickery, all head us towards an ultimate German inflation style end result with some dictator as "savior". Perhaps some new fake-a-demic will cause suspension of elections.
The easy pretensions about Oswald, the books supporting the official line, the commissions of inquiry, some of which were manned or had chairmen who were enemies of John F. Kennedy or who had even been fired by him...all these things combine, in the collective subconscious of the American people, young and old, to increase the impetus for dramatic and sweeping political reforms.
Let us accept no more nonsense about Oswald, nor the quality of the "news° about him or lack thereof. Just my opinion: He was there all right but that look on his face, those of us who saw it, show full well he was hardly to be considered the sole person involved. Let the release of the classified documents finally give some clues about the others.
I know this is rude, and I am sorry, but yours is a silly comment. You see two looks on Oswald's face that Friday. The first is the infamous smirk, which everyone noticed instantly. ( You see a variant of it, made hybrid with insolence, in the mugshots taken of him not long after midnight on November 23. )
And you do see the bland look. You also see and hear the unbothered non sequitur of a response he gives to a reporter who barks at him, "Did you shoot the President?!"
"No, sir, no one has said that to me yet" is, I believe, his verbatim response. My response: guilty as Hell! Any of us, if in that position and indeed, innocent of the act, would have snarled back, "No, g*ddamnit, I did not!"
But Oswald was a psychopath. Psychopathy does confer certain feral gifts upon its bearers. It also sets them so apart from humanity that it would never occur to a psychopath in that situation that the response needed to perhaps throw the investigators a little off their confidence would be a feigning of outrage.
A different psychopath, Ted Bundy, suffered from the same limitation. When asked by his friend, the crime writer, Ann Rule, "Ted, did you kill all those girls?" Bundy replied mildly, "There's no evidence there."
As usual, various government officials have done all of us, and themselves, a disservice by hiding this information for so many years beyond what was necessary.
Even the Trump administration wouldn't release the remaining information when they had the chance.
The tabloid clickbait headlines don't surprise me in the least. We now live in that world.
Just imagine how much fuel they would have added to the fire if the news was reported like that in the mid-60's.
Yes, we had tabloids back then, but now almost all mainstream outlets are irresponsible hacks if they think it will pay.
Whatever the truth of the JFK assassination is, the speculations and conspiracy theories associated with the event will provide material for the tabloids and 'journalists' for at least another century.
Gerald, agreed. Tabloid sensationalism now called clickbait still sells. But nothing new here. Release the files!
Click bait headlines have been around forever. I recall Bill Clinton promising to release all the files back on n the 1990’s. Didn’t the House Assassination Committee in 1978 have full access to the JFK files? With regards to Oswald’s trip to Mexico lots of Americans were going to the Cuban embassy in Mexico City for visas. It’s not surprising the CIA had the place under surveillance.
In the Frontline documentary “Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald,” former CIA director Richard Helms stated that he couldn’t explain why there weren’t photos of Lee Harvey Oswald in Mexico City at the Cuban Embassy, and that there were problems with the cameras the CIA agents were using that day. I’m guessing the CIA destroyed any evidence they had that would show they could’ve prevented the assassination. I wouldn’t expect much more from any future release of documents by the CIA.
Because it was always meant to be that. That's why it was said in the first place.
Daily Mail has always been shit.
Release the files! Something we can all agree on.
I still believe Watergate, Nixon and his advisors supposed just covering up the break in was all to do with their involvement in the Assassination parts of JFK , they were all implicated in the tapes ,the break in , also on the Bench parts or even named shooters by themselves or their Family , also Vice President Ford who took over from Nixon as President pardoned Nixon ,and Ford gave the elogue at President George W Bushes funeral stated " WE ALL KNOW THE THANKS WE ALL OWE GEORGE FOR WHAT HE DID FOR US ALL " To all the C.IA spooks involved in the cover ups of them all etc
Trump had four years to release all the documents. Why not then?
Thanks for your comment on the JFK assassination !
As a teenager, I saw the look that came over Oswald's face, on live TV, while Oswald was being escorted to the Dallas police jail, as a reporter shouted out asking if he had killed President Kennedy. It is rarely, if ever, shown these days. That look of unfeigned utter astonishment was the self realization that he, Oswald, had become the greatest patsy of the 20th century. I've seen Jesse Ventura demonstrate the use of firing the rifle Oswald used, a clumsy bolt-action rifle which strains credulity as being the weapon used to fire several accurate shots in a short bit of time. At the time, the "news" reported the Italian name of the rifle and we all assumed it was some fancy, powerful accurate weapon an assassin would use instead of its actual status as a foreign piece of junk for rapid accurate shooting. We also noticed the Friday edition of the NY Times, the day after the assassination, referring to Oswald as the "Assassin", instead of the ALLEGED Assassin.
"Fall guy" approved and implemented.
There was so much in that pre Internet era covered up, smoothed over, so much deception.
But there is one unarguable conclusion. There was a coup that day that removed the elected leader of our government. The policies all changed, the nature of America changed after that coup and we have been dreaming of getting it back ever since. John Kennedy was no angel to be sure, but the level of his speeches, his over all intent, his disgust with the CIA and the instant wars and regime changes and the vast apparatus supporting them, all point to a President who would have enacted some great reforms had he lived. The fake named "Federal" (it is a private bank) Reserve bank continues to this day. The balancing act stealing wealth by inflation, the endless deficits to support more foreign adventures and neo-con trickery, all head us towards an ultimate German inflation style end result with some dictator as "savior". Perhaps some new fake-a-demic will cause suspension of elections.
The easy pretensions about Oswald, the books supporting the official line, the commissions of inquiry, some of which were manned or had chairmen who were enemies of John F. Kennedy or who had even been fired by him...all these things combine, in the collective subconscious of the American people, young and old, to increase the impetus for dramatic and sweeping political reforms.
Let us accept no more nonsense about Oswald, nor the quality of the "news° about him or lack thereof. Just my opinion: He was there all right but that look on his face, those of us who saw it, show full well he was hardly to be considered the sole person involved. Let the release of the classified documents finally give some clues about the others.
I know this is rude, and I am sorry, but yours is a silly comment. You see two looks on Oswald's face that Friday. The first is the infamous smirk, which everyone noticed instantly. ( You see a variant of it, made hybrid with insolence, in the mugshots taken of him not long after midnight on November 23. )
And you do see the bland look. You also see and hear the unbothered non sequitur of a response he gives to a reporter who barks at him, "Did you shoot the President?!"
"No, sir, no one has said that to me yet" is, I believe, his verbatim response. My response: guilty as Hell! Any of us, if in that position and indeed, innocent of the act, would have snarled back, "No, g*ddamnit, I did not!"
But Oswald was a psychopath. Psychopathy does confer certain feral gifts upon its bearers. It also sets them so apart from humanity that it would never occur to a psychopath in that situation that the response needed to perhaps throw the investigators a little off their confidence would be a feigning of outrage.
A different psychopath, Ted Bundy, suffered from the same limitation. When asked by his friend, the crime writer, Ann Rule, "Ted, did you kill all those girls?" Bundy replied mildly, "There's no evidence there."
Was Oswald supposed to say, “yes - I did”? No, and he certainly didn’t respond as any innocent person would to the question