Why Do We Care?

[Antti Hynonen]

Richard J. Smith Posted Today, 01:09 PM

  QUOTE(Antti Hynonen @ Jan 13 2005, 03:09 PM)

* Oswalds tax records are classified, due to "National Security".

Antti,

Lee Oswald's tax returns are not classified. The release of documents under the JFK Act does not include tax records. Tax returns are confidential and can only be released by authorization from the subject party or in this case, his widow. Marina did sign a waiver releasing Lee's tax returns.

http://www.jfklancer.com/LHOtax.html

RJS

Richard,

Thanks for correcting that. I wonder if the publication of these records is known by John Armstrong. I recall one of the issues he wished to investigate further was Lee's employment at different times. As I recall he wanted to use Lee's tax records to prove the point that Harvey and Lee both had independent jobs at different locations at the same time or something to that effect.

I can't access the files through the link you gave, nevertheless, I'm glad they're released.

Edited January 14, 2005 by Antti Hynonen

[Paul Troglia]

simple....

Because if LHO didn't do it alone....everything else is a lie.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Tom,

Thanks for your answer, Tom. One thing more: In your view, if Oswald did it alone, would everything else be the truth?

[Tom Kutzer]

simple....

Because if LHO didn't do it alone....everything else is a lie.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Tom,

Thanks for your answer, Tom. One thing more: In your view, if Oswald did it alone, would everything else be the truth?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not entirely...a wise young lady once told me "you can't know everything"....however....IMO, IF....if....if there was a cover-up, and the events after JFK's death were stage managed...not according to JFK's script.....i.e. Viet Nam, the Fed,etc....what else in this "land of Freedom" are we being lied to about?.....or not told "for reasons of National Security"....Iraq, OBL, 9-11....Haliburton.....the list is bigger than my endurance over a keyboard....and it goes against all we learn about our particular form of democracy.....

"for the people, by the people" suddenly lacks meaning, doesn't it.....

" you can't trust freedom when it's not in your hands."

[Paul Troglia]

simple....

Because if LHO didn't do it alone....everything else is a lie.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Tom,

Thanks for your answer, Tom. One thing more: In your view, if Oswald did it alone, would everything else be the truth?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not entirely...a wise young lady once told me "you can't know everything"....however....IMO, IF....if....if there was a cover-up, and the events after JFK's death were stage managed...not according to JFK's script.....i.e. Viet Nam, the Fed,etc....what else in this "land of Freedom" are we being lied to about?.....or not told "for reasons of National Security"....Iraq, OBL, 9-11....Haliburton.....the list is bigger than my endurance over a keyboard....and it goes against all we learn about our particular form of democracy.....

"for the people, by the people" suddenly lacks meaning, doesn't it.....

" you can't trust freedom when it's not in your hands."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks again Tom. Your responses are helpful to me. Another question: In your view, is National Security ever a legitimate reason to deny information to the public?

[Tom Kutzer]

Well, Paul......it would depend on just what info was being denied, wouldn't it?

for example, I wouldn't want CNN or a web/print outlet revealing any current military operations plans.....that would be silly.

However, to continue to deny information on an event that happened 41 years ago does tend to breed a certain sense of mistrust....IMO, all Americans certainly want to believe it is truly "for the people, by the people"....to face facts, it has always been for the very wealthy, and any benefits that trickle down the chain have made America a popular place to live.....but who wants that blatantly shoved in their face, especially after being through 12 years of American Public schools?...

Perhaps I digress, but I see it like this....

If it was LHO alone....then hey, it was a natural progression of power....'Nam, etc. just being the natural course of events (mis)guided by persons put there by the system as we've more or less learned to accept it....most of us, more or slightly less....

If LHO had help...and the apperent nature of that help extended then, and continues to be extended to this day, as some posters suggest....that I tend to agree with....then it's a whole different ball game, isn't it?.....suddenly, ALL "conspiracy theories" aquire a certain legitimacy... from the "NWO" on out to...*gulp*....UFO's, lol....I've always found the Gen. Smedley Butler story fascinating, myself....

in other words, if "they" are willing to deny/lie about JFK......then what else is unplausibly deniable?

to me, it invoves the base question of whether Democracy really works or not...as we learn it in the States, anyway.

[Paul Troglia]

Tom, thank you, I appreciate your perspective. If you can stand one and a half more questions, here goes: Does every conspiracy theory have more believability for you than the lone assassin conclusion? If not, which is most implausible to you? (one or two points about the theory will be enough.)

Thanks again, Tom.

[Tom Kutzer]

Tom, thank you, I appreciate your perspective.  If you can stand one and a half more questions, here goes: Does every conspiracy theory have more believability for you than the lone assassin conclusion?  If not, which is most implausible to you?  (one or two points about the theory will be enough.)

Thanks again, Tom. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hmmmm....hope I've understood correctly....so I'll be brief.

I'm not real hot on Greens and Grey's....much better chance LHO did it on his own, lol....

However, nothing humans do or might have done would surprise me.

Particularly in the pursuit of power.

A question for you, if I may?

If I'm reading right, you support the LN conclusion....that's ok, I can see that side as well...although I don't believe it....so..

What do make of Eisenhower's heads up on the MIC...or MICC if you prefer?

a cranky old man.....or a warning to America?

[Jim Root]

In my opinion the assassination of JFK put our nation into what I refer to as a sort of national post traumatic stress syndorme.

Where the perfect world that we were taught that we lived in no longer existed.

Jim Root

[Paul Troglia]

Tom, thank you, I appreciate your perspective.  If you can stand one and a half more questions, here goes: Does every conspiracy theory have more believability for you than the lone assassin conclusion?  If not, which is most implausible to you?  (one or two points about the theory will be enough.)

Thanks again, Tom. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hmmmm....hope I've understood correctly....so I'll be brief.

I'm not real hot on Greens and Grey's....much better chance LHO did it on his own, lol....

However, nothing humans do or might have done would surprise me.

Particularly in the pursuit of power.

A question for you, if I may?

If I'm reading right, you support the LN conclusion....that's ok, I can see that side as well...although I don't believe it....so..

What do make of Eisenhower's heads up on the MIC...or MICC if you prefer?

a cranky old man.....or a warning to America?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi again,

Military Industrial Complex--definitely a warning from a guy who knew. But I don't see it as the carte blanche answer to the assassination. By the way, MICs are not always bad. Did pretty good from 1941-45.

[Tom Kutzer]

No, not carte blanche...but every good murder mystery needs suspects.

I'd be interested in a LN reaction if it turned out that it really all DOES tie together...MIC, Bush/CIA...what would you say then?....I'm not trying to wag my tongue at you or anything, just an honest inquiry....

anyways...

IMO, Ike the great organiser and staff officer, and outgoing CinC, would know when the MIC was becoming more than the machine that won The Last Good War.

But I'm just a working stiff with a severe interest problem, what do I know, lol....

[Paul Troglia]

In my opinion the assassination of JFK put our nation into what I refer to as a sort of national post traumatic stress syndorme.

Where the perfect world that we were taught that we lived in no longer existed.

Jim Root

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Jim,

Good to hear from you in this string, too. I think you're right about the lost innocence thing--but we add to the loss when, perhaps, we make the event into something it never was.

Paul

[Tim Gratz]

Paul wrote:

Another question: In your view, is National Security ever a legitimate reason to deny information to the public?

Let me jump in here, if I may, to add my two cents' worth (all the value some of you may put on my opinion).

Assume, just for the sake of argument, that either the Soviet Union or Cuba was behind the assassination and our leaders were, justifiably I would say) concerned that if that information became public knowledge, there was a great danger of events escalating to a war with millions of casualties. Under that scenario, would our leaders be justified in "covering up" the facts to prevent millions of innocent deaths. I am not even positing this happened, but what if the Kennedy family supported the "cover up" for that very reason?

Now let us assume the above scenario with one difference: in fact, there was no foreign involvement but our leaders had reasonable grounds to suspect it.(Some even argue evidence of foreign conspiracy was planted to propmt a cover up.) Again, the question arises: was it justified to defer the truth about the assassination from coming out to prevent a war and the death of millions of people?

Regretfully, I would answer the question, it probably was.

Again, it is my scenario that while the CIA did not kill Kennedy directlly. its murderous policies led inexorably to his death.

[Dawn Meredith]

Part of the problem in identifying culprits and bringing them to justice is that apathy is abroad in the land. It's been that way for a while (the movie JFK causing only a brief blip of interest but at least getting a records law passed).

When the HSCA concluded that JFK died probably as the result of a conspiracy, all that I recall happening was a gigantic yawn in America. I remember Oglesby writing briefly on this somewhere, something about how he couldn't figure out the American people, but I've been unable to find the passage.

Polls say that most Americans believe there was a conspiracy, but at the same time it's obvious that those same people don't care. That's why I see working on this case as mainly an academic exercise. I don't see it leading to justice. But I hope I'm wrong.

Ron

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

___________________________

Ron,

Might you be referring to Carl Oglesby's comments on the media? If so there are three chapters in Carl's book " The JFK Assassination The Facts and the Theories". Part 4, ch 7 "The Behavior of the Media" and chapter 10 "Reflections on the Assassination Media", also ch 13 "Media Reactions". You can probably find this great little book online. (amazon I mean)

Dawn

[Paul Troglia]

Part of the problem in identifying culprits and bringing them to justice is that apathy is abroad in the land. It's been that way for a while (the movie JFK causing only a brief blip of interest but at least getting a records law passed).

When the HSCA concluded that JFK died probably as the result of a conspiracy, all that I recall happening was a gigantic yawn in America. I remember Oglesby writing briefly on this somewhere, something about how he couldn't figure out the American people, but I've been unable to find the passage.

Polls say that most Americans believe there was a conspiracy, but at the same time it's obvious that those same people don't care. That's why I see working on this case as mainly an academic exercise. I don't see it leading to justice. But I hope I'm wrong.

Ron

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Ron,

You're right when you sat apathy is abroad in the land, although you (conspiracy theorists) are certainly winning the battle. Most people believe there was a conspiracy to kill Kennedy.

But you are wrong in an important point. The House Select Committee on Assassinations did conclude there was more than one shooter because of the famous motorcycle dictabelt recording. But as you know, that conclusion was debunked after an amateur investigator proved the recording was not done at the time of the assassination. But even that information didn't change many people's minds. There are just too many theories. Kind of like Dr. Seuss' story, "The 500 Hats of Bartholemew Cubbins." Every time he took off his hat for the king, another hat appeared. PT

[Paul Troglia]

Hi Tim,

The Kennedy family couldn't even cover up a single death at Chappaquiddick for crying out loud. How could their agreeing to a cover up to prevent mass death be worth anything?

So the CIA did not kill Kennedy, but blame them in some way because they're bad guys. Now who's acting like a conspirator?

But I digress, sorry. This is supposed to be an analysis of why we care.