Terry Adams

“I told the FBI what I had heard [two shots from behind the grassy knoll fence], but they said it couldn’t have happened that way and that I must have been imagining things. So I testified the way they wanted me to. I just didn’t want to stir up any more pain and trouble for the family.”– Kennedy aide Kenneth O’Donnell, quoted by House Speaker Thomas P. “Tip” O’Neill Jr. in “Man of the House,” p. 178. O’Donnell was riding in the Secret Service follow-up car with Dave Powers, who was present and told O’Neill he had the same recollection. (this is a post made by Goban Saor on the 'Reopen the Kennedy Case' forum)

Mr. Parnell, I agree with the terminology, "killing Castro business." I am sure that a tremendous amount of money was spent by the U. S. Government and others to "kill" Castro. The fact that he was not assassinated shows that he may well have been a story from a bad novel. If I am correct, I think that Castro himself claimed that over 100 attempts had been made on his life. It was just great politics on all sides to keep him alive. I'm sure that the little people involved were trying their best to get the job done, when all the time, there were actions, over their heads, that kept anything "real" from happening. I am sure that many, many people (powers that be) got rich in the "killing Castro business." This is somewhat off course, but if that had really been an effort to allow someone such as Veciana and his people to have removed Castro, the tragic events of Nov. 22, 1963 may have been averted.

Pat, you are absolutely right on the money. People under 30 look at JFK as they do Abraham Lincoln. He was one of our past presidents who was also assassinated! End of discussion.

Paul, Are you saying that the CIA did not kill, or have JFK killed? I thought that was a given among the CTers! I know that everyone, including, but not limited to, LBJ, Jimmy Hoffa and Edwin Walker, to name a few, have been blamed. I have been under the obviously mistaken impression, according to you, that basically anyone connected with the assassination were connected, somehow, with the CIA! I have been believing the government did it since my Dad and I watched Oswald murdered on live television! So, I would greatly appreciate it if you will tell me what to tell the people I talk with, and have been talking with most of my life, about that horrible tragedy on November 22, 1963, NOW! And Paul, I am not really speaking directly to you, I am just trying to grasp onto something real after almost 54 years .

If this was supposed to be a critique of the film, Chappaquiddick, what was this statement of 'fact' doing in it? "The Kennedys lived outside the law; the one instance in American history of an illegally stolen presidential election was the election of John F. Kennedy in 1960. He in all likelihood lost the race to Richard Nixon, but his father tried to steal the election for him by manipulating the vote tallies in (among other places) Illinois"

Are there suggestions on where one may find Steve Jaffe on multiple interviews ( I mean over time). This gentleman has so much information on The JFK assassination, MLK and even the Princess Diana death (not to mention Jonestown). He is obviously elderly, based on his age when he was working with Jim Garrison. It would be such an injustice to genuine history to have his massive vault of knowledge about all I've mentioned and probably so much more that will be missed out on, just because he was not recorded before we lose him forever! I certainly hope, if that has not already been extensively done, that someone who has access to Mr. Jaffe will sit with him and get all that he wishes to reveal on record, for all time.

I do think that the dust we see in the first picture came from the window sill, but my question is, since they mention hearing the shells hitting the floor and the ratcheting of the rifle, why wouldn't they say that it seemed as if a cannon was blasting above them. I mean, if you look at the picture of them in the window, there is only 8-10 feet between them and the shooter. Those shots should have been LOUD!

Larry, thanks for that information. I was under the obviously mistaken impression that President Kennedy called off any support, very early, after he concluded that he had been duped into the Bay of Pigs fiasco by the CIA. This was my reasoning on thinking that Castro was playing it up to be a much more involved USA.

The reason that I posted this was the fact that Castro indicated that 'hundreds' of his soldiers were killed and that the invaders had U.S. plane support as well as an aircraft carrier. This just was not the case. I just don't understand him bringing this up, at all, in 2016.

Referring to the 1961 failed invasion of the Bay of Pigs, Castro wrote of the U.S.' "mercenary force with cannons and armored infantry, equipped with aircraft ... trained and accompanied by warships and aircraft carriers in the U.S. raiding our country. Nothing can justify this premeditated attack that cost our country hundreds of killed and wounded." Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/fidel-castro-obama-221279#ixzz44FO5gsKr

Bob, I have mentioned this before, and I think that it was Lt. Day of the DPD said that one could not tell if a rifle had been fired today, last week, or a month ago. What I have always argued is that by the time the rifle was found, fresh gunpowder would still have allowed for a "smell test". What are your thoughts on this?

"It was my impression that O'Donnell had the greatest influence in shaping the President's most important decisions. He was able to set aside his own prejudices against individuals and his own ideological commitments (I would rate him a moderate Democrat) and appraise the alternatives with total objectivity. It was impossible to categorize O'Donnell, as White House observers did with other staff members, as either a "hawk" or a "dove" on foreign policy, or a Stevenson liberal or Truman conservative on civil rights. JFK gave extra weight to O'Donnell's opinions because he knew he had no personal cause to argue. Ken had only one criterion: Will this action help or hurt the President? And that, for O'Donnell, was another way of asking: Will it help or hurt the country?" Pierre Salinger (1966). I cannot imagine anyone doubting Kenny O'Donnell's loyalty to President Kennedy. They were extremely close. He was part of the "Irish Mafia", having known the Kennedy family since rooming with RFK at Harvard. And yes, he did help plan the motorcade, which caused him to blame himself for the assassination until his own death in 1977 from alcoholism at the age of 53.

I got the impression that he HAD looked at those files, and found what he expected to find; nothing! Just what the rest of us will get to look at in 2017.

Tom, IMO, this picture goes to the very heart of the problem in identifying people from old photos or film frames. How many people here see Andy Griffith of "Mayberry" instead of of Ed Byrnes in the still?

I can picture that/those scenario(s). Thanks John!

John, I've never heard this before. I was under the impression that LBJ was going around saying WWIII, but never called for a higher alert. So, I am mistaken about him on this?

"Fears that Moscow might have masterminded the president’s killing rose sharply when the CIA was unable to locate Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev for 24-48 hours afterwards. Agency officials worried that he was “either hunkering down for an American reprisal, or possibly preparing to strike the United States.” This is from the article that Mr. Caddy posted. Yet like LBJ, there was no effort, nor request, to raise our preparedness for war. defensively or offensively. So, this makes what is written about or by the CIA less than believable, IMO.

Thanks for the picture, James. And David, to put words with the picture is a treat, thank you!

Also, I would hope that someone would please post the photograph for those that have not seen it.

Does anyone know if there is film of this 'infamous' picture? I would like to know how LBJ reacted. Because, from the look he had on his face, if he did not know that it was the president pulling on his sleeve, he may very well have struck out or at least "cussed out" the perpetrator. Obviously, the reason this has been shown in relation to the assassination is to show that LBJ had absolutely no respect for the President, by acting this way in his presence.

Mr Roberdeau, thank you for all of the, obviously, exhaustive work, including photos, film, interviews, etc. But, what I am writing about now is; It looks to me as if the president is hit in the head a second time, after the massive wound at 313, (during your film that includes the rifle shots) as Mrs. Kennedy is beginning to climb onto the trunk of the car, there seems to be a pinkish projectile exit his head, which could only be another shot, in my humble opinion. The reason that i bring this to the attention of the forum is that ZI have read about a shot after the one in frame 313, but never was able to clarify that. It now seems perfectly clear, to me at least.

People have been saying over the years that if Oswald had been moved on time, Ruby would not have been there to shoot him. What if it was just the opposite? Oswald's delay in being brought down was BECAUSE Ruby was not there. When he arrived, word went to the chief that Ruby was finally in place, so bring out the patsy!!

A big argument over time has been about his jacket and shirt riding up, thus allowing for an ongoing discussion about where the bullet actually entered the President's back. It is very clear in this film (with his arm resting on the side of the convertible) that the shirt can be seen above the collar. which would mean, in my opinion, that there would have been very little change in this configuration, if any, by the time of the assassination.

Robert, what argument would you be able to make differently today based on; "there is no absolute proof behind our arguments unless we were allowed to handle C2766 immediately after the assassination".

Post removed (by me)