Tuesday, October 23, 2007

Why Is CIA Suppressing JFK Files?

By Lisa Pease
October 23, 2007

As Jefferson Morley reports in the Huffington Post:

"Lawyers for the Central Intelligence Agency faced pointed questions in a federal court hearing Monday morning about the agency's efforts to block disclosure of long-secret records about the assassination of President John F. Kennedy."

Read on.


droberdeau said...

Dealey Plaza Professionally Surveyed Map Detailing 11-22-63 Precise victims locations, Witnesses & Photographers, Suspected bullet trajectories, Evidence, and Vital Information Collected in One Location for Your Considerations.....


Discovery: The Rosemary Willis Zapruder filmed 2nd Headsnap: West, Ultrafast, & Directly Towards the Grassy Knoll .....


President Kennedy "4 Principles" speech, others JFK assassination research links, and my discoveries and contributions for your considerations.....


Robert said...

Walter Cronkite did a special years ago on the JFK assassination. He aired evidence both for and against conspiracy and at the end indicated that the evidence came out to a draw.

Cronkite was a smart man. He knew what could air and what could not. At the time, a draw was better than what the mainstream media were saying. The media were fond of calling anyone who implied any sort of conspiracy a kook.

However, in the middle of his special, he revealed something that says all you need to know if you have your head on half way straight. The autopsy of an assassinated PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES was performed by young U.S. Navy doctors who had never done a ballistic autopsy in their lives. They were not only inexperienced. They were military directly under the control of the U.S. government.

Later I saw a special on PBS that aired detailed interviews with the former lawyer of the Capo Mafioso of New Orleans. This lawyer claimed to have been present when the news of the assassination was received by a combination of labor and mafia bosses, including his mafia client and Jimmy Hoffa of the Teamsters Union. He declared that they raised a toast, and as they did they exclaimed, "We did it!" and cheered. That excerpt was only one of many revelations concerning the criminal undergound's involvement in the JFK assassination this lawyer made during the program.

It is well known, especially since the CIA officially recognized it recently, that the CIA and mafia crime bosses collaborated on plots to assassinate Castro as well as in other arenas. It seems rather apparent at this point that the JFK assassination is also a case in point in this regard. The lawyer stated that the mafia had originally contemplated assassinating Robert Kennedy, but decided that was too obvious. They then decided that getting rid of JFK would get rid of Robert without so transparently implicating them.

heav said...

"If the CIA was involved in the Kennedy assassination, wouldn't that change entirely our understanding of events from that time forth, and wouldn't that call into question much of the reporting on the case, and the credibility of the media from that time forward?"

The same thing applies to the events of 9/11/2001. Michael Ruppert opens his lectures on the flaws in the official story of 9/11/2001 by playing the Zapruder film of the Kennedy assassination repeatedly about 40 times (not an exaggeration) until it is imprinted on your mind that the fatal bullet struck JFK from the front, from the direction of the Grassy Knoll.

I am old enough to remember we were told that viewing that film would be too much of a shock and that to "protect" us it would be locked away and never shown for x number of years.

In his presentations Ruppert then states that clear video evidence has been available for many years that proves that the Warren Commission Report is a lie, yet the grip of the propaganda machine on people's minds is so great that to this day there is confusion about that issue.

If you watch the video of the Twin Towers coming down it clearly shows buildings that are being blown to smithereens. And does not show the sort of gradual structural failure that would result from only the forces of fire and gravity.

I agree with the argument that until the record is set straight on defining issues of their time such as 9/11/2001 misinterpretation of such events calls in to question most reporting from that time forward.

Please spend a couple of hours at the Architects for 9/11 Truth web site at: http://www.ae911truth.org/
and review the compelling evidence which shows that the official narrative of 9/11/2001 has to be false.